FLM 

2015 

070681 


' '■ 777 
,f "' ' - i y 1 

rl / Vi/ i 

' 7 / : . t 

7 7 .‘ ;> 


j i / ■, - 1 ■ . * i 

ir/i'-vt'-' i;: ■/ : ; -■ ; ■ ” .7- ;■ 

vKuV 77/#7 : 

:./>v '7 v 'V 7;,'V ; / ^ " 

V:\v. ■ ; 7 7 7 ^ ,7,U7V 


fi ; ; i>v y4 



V-'-'v 





; IV/ 7' ' . ..^v 7/ , ; v < 

•■■■■■.; v • .76. !) V - : v 7 

. 

• . ■ 

' , • M Vv , .. v 7 . >\ "• >•; • / . , ■ \ ’ 

,\7; ■. V. 

• "V; 77 r V . I 'M ' , 

V' V : • • r ; 7 ■ • ' » ' • . 

V • ' , V .'Vi V7 > - v ' t 

. , i • . . |\ ■ • > .. ; ' v„ 'i 

i ? fv' ' : , U 

>v, ■ v. ;> ■ ■ ■ iti; ' ••/ . ; 

■ •■■■■; ■ v, ;; i si,’ ■■ : : f > ' s / 

i: > . > ' >■; V V V • \ v --it ; ! >> < 








































German Political Refugees 

In the United States during the Period 

From 1815^1860, 



BY 

ERNEST BRUNCKEN, MILWAUKEE. 


Special Print from “Deutach-Amerikanische Ueschichtsbiatter.” 

1904. 


i 



PUBLISHED BY: 

R AND E RESEARCH ASSOCIATES, 
PUBLISHERS AND DISTRIBUTORS OF 
ETHNIC STUDIES 

4843 MISSION STREET 
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 

AND 

i858i McFarland avenue 

SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 

PUBLISHER, 

ROBERT D. REED 

EDITOR, 

ADAM S. ETEROVICH 


LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
CATALOG CARD NUMBER 


/ 0-754 





REPRINT SAN FRANCISCO 
CALIFORNIA 


1970 






























































































German Political Refugees In the United States during the 

Period from 1815 — 1860. 

By Ernest Bruncken. 


CHAPTER I. 


Introduction. 

The population of the five states devel- 
oped out of the old territory northwest 
of the Ohio, and in a less degree of many 
other states in all sections of the Union, 
contains a very large element of German 
birth or recent descent. The admixture 
of this Teutonic element differs in im- 
portance in the different states, as well as 
in different portions of each state. Sta- 
tistics, which of necessity show only the 
bare numbers of those immigrated from 
German countries, with their immediate 
descendants, are quite inadequate as a 
basis for estimating the influence of this 
element on the development and history 
of these sections, for the reason that 
many other factors besides numbers enter 
into the problem. Still, the census fig- 
ures are of importance, and it will appear 
that the three states which have the 
largest proportion of Teutonic inhabit- 
ants, to wit: Wisconsin, Ohio and Illi- 
nois, show the strongest and most numer- 
ous traces of German influence. 1 

Among the German immigrants of 
these states, who arrived in this country 
between the years 1815 and i860, there 
was a class, small in proportion to the 
total number of arrivals, but of peculiar 
importance to the understanding of the 
part played by the German element in the 


developing of the American people. This 
class is that of the political exiles, com- 
prising not only those who were com- 
pelled to leave their native land to escape 
punishment for political offenses, but also 
many who voluntarily expatriated them- 
selves on account of dissatisfaction with 
the political conditions prevailing at 
home. 

The political refugees were mostly men 
of considerable intelligence and educa- 
tion, of enthusiastic and energetic tem- 
peraments, and, moreover, men with 
ideals to which they were ready to devote 
their activities, as was proven by the fact 
itself that they had risked their homes, 
their possessions, and in many cases their 
liberty and^ lives in order to change the 
political condition of their country. Their 
presence on this side of the Atlantic acted 
on the inert mass of their countrymen in 
the United States like a leaven to give a 
higher and more varied life. This effect 
was shown first within the body of the 
German residents themselves. Soon the 
new vigor began to exercise its influence 
on the other elements of population, espe- 
cially in the field of politics. Particu- 
larly, when the slavery question became 
a burning issue, the re-alignment of par- 
ties after the rise of Republicanism was 
determined to a considerable degree by 
the refugees, who by that time had be- 
come the leaders of a great part of the 


*) An attempt at estimating 1 the number of Germans and their descendants living in 
the United States is made by Theodore Poesche in Eickhoff’* “Aus der Neuen Heimath”, 
p fage 130. "Mr. Vbescne was ior many years statistican in the treasury department at Wash- 
ington, and is also a well-known writer on ethnologicical subjects, especially on account of his 
volume ^he Aryans”. (See also note 61.) From the table found in the place above men- 
tioned it appears among other things, that from 1820 to 1800, inclusive, the number of Germans 
who came to the United States was 1,186,376. 


























































































































































2 


German voters. After the civil war, 
during which many of the refugees dis- 
tinguished themselves both in the field 
and the council chamber, their direct in- 
fluence on public affairs gradually de- 
clined. But during the short period of 
their ascendancy they modified pro- 
foundly the life and attitude of the Ger- 
man element, and thereby the character 
of the American people. Nor is it diffi- 
cult to find their vestiges in the institu- 
tions, social, political and religious, of a 
large portion of the United States. 

The German element in this country, 
numerically strong thqugh it had been 
from early colonial times, had not, exer- 
cised a noticeable direct influence on the 
public life and institutions of the nation, 
until the advent of the class which forms 
the subject of this essay. It was aptly 
compared by Friedrich Kapp to an army 
without officers. Almost without excep- 
tion the German immigrants devoted 
themselves diligently and exclusively to 
the bettering of their materiaj condition. 
They were largely sprang from the poor- 
est and most ignorant classes of the 
Fatherland. They had neither time, in- 
clination nor ability to concern them- 
selves with affairs outside of their farms 
or workshops. Their descendants either 
disappeared in the general mass of the 
American people — disappeared so com- 
pletely that in many cases not even their 
names remain to testify to their German 
ancestry — or they kept apart from the 
general current of the national life so en- 
tirely that they might as well have dwelt 
on another continent for all the influence 
they had, directly, on the national growth 
and character. It is true that where the 
German element was particularly strong, 
as notably in some portions of Pennsyl- 
vania* tnere were not lacking ctre be gin - 
nings of activities not purely private and 
economic. But these germs of intellect- 
ual life, separated as they were from both 


the Anglo-American and German parent 
stocks, languished and withered long be- 
fore they could come into flower and 
fruit. 

i 

It would be a misapprehension of the 
situation if one were to infer from this 
lack of direct and open influence that our 
national development was in no wise 
affected by the presence of so large a 
number of Germans. The mere com- 
mingling of races must of necessity have 
had its indirect and physiological effects. 
Moreover, in the economic condition of 
the country, the German, and in particu- 
lar the German farmer, began at an 
early date to teach by his example better 
methods to his neighbor of different 
stock. But these influences, exercised 
unconsciously, are hard to trace in detail, 
and could not have prevented the Ger- 
man element from disappearing without 
leaving vestiges that history can record 
with any degree of precision. It was 
not till the political refugees began to 
furnish officers to the Teutonic host that 
the Germans began to play a perceptible 
part in the struggles of American life. 

The time when this new class of immi- 
grants first made their appearance was 
that of the restoration following the over, 
throw of Napoleon. It coincides almost 
exactly with the time when German life 
in this country was at its lowest ebb. 
During the period from the Revolution- 
ary War to the War of 1812, there was 
but little immigration from Germany. As 
a consequence the amalgamation of the 
German residents made very rapid 
progress. German churches adopted 
English as the language of Divine serv- 
ice ; German newspapers suspended or 
were changed into English ones ; in many 
neighborhoods where for almost a cen- 
tury G er m a t. had been the langu a ge of 
business and familiar conversation the 
younger generation preferred the English 
tongue. But very soon after general 




























■ 






























3 


peace had followed the disturbances of 
the Napoleonic era, a new stream of im- 
migration set in. Its character was at 
first very much like the older one. As 
formerly, most of the immigrants were 
ignorant and poor. For at least another 
decade a large proportion of them came 
as redemptioners, paying for their pas- 
sage by a period of what was practically 
slavery. The cruel abuses and scandals 
connected with immigrant ships did not 
cease until after ocean steamers had re- 
placed the slow sailing vessels. But soon 
the character of immigration changed. 
Beginning with the third decade of the 
century, an increasing number of well-to- 
do country people came to take up the 
fertile agricultural lands of the west. It 
is not the purpose, at present, to write a 
history of German immigration, and con- 
sequently the various interesting features 
and incidents of this new stream of arriv- 
als need not further be touched upon, ex- 
cept so far as to remind the reader that 
the overwhelming majority of the new- 
comers continued to have no purpose be- 
yond the bettering of their material con- 
dition. . 

But for the first time, during this 
period, the Teutonic army had its offi- 
cers,* composed of men of superior edu- 
cation, and with purposes in mind that 
looked beyond the gaining of a good live- 
lihood and amassing of fortunes. To 
explain the causes of this change, a 
glance at the political and social condi- 
tions of the Fatherland will be a neces- 
sary part of our inquiry. The changes 
that went on there determined the 

♦Editorial Note. — This is rather too 
broad a statement, for it sounds as if the Ger- 
man immigrants before 1830 had had no in- 
tellectual leaders. Certainly Pastorius, 
Muehlenbere, and a great many other minis- 
Tfefs OI the~“Gospel, who came 10 this country 
in ante-revolutionary times, were men of su- 
perior education, and also wielded no small 
nfluence in political matters. 


changes in the character and attitude of 
the political emigration. As the year 
1848 marks an epoch in the history of 
Germany, so it did in that of the Ger- 
mans in this country. The most natural 
division of our subject will therefore be 
into the periods before and after 1848. 

We call these men political exiles. But 
nowhere can political movements be en- 
tirely separated from religious and social 
agitations, and least of all is this possible 
in the case of the men we speak of. Few 
political movements were ever So largely 
determined by the religious and philo- 
sophical tenets of its promoters as the 
movement for German unity and free- 
dom. To the Radicals who landed upon 
our shores liberty meant a great deal 
more than merely a certain form of gov- 
ernment and a certain system of laws. 
Quite as important as these was, to 
them, the freedom of thought and belief 
concerning the greatest questions of 
human existence. As true heirs of the 
generation of Kant, Fichte and Hegel, 
questions of metaphysics seemed to them 
very closely related to questions of con- 
stitutions. This tendency to mingle theii 
religion, or lack of religion, ver^ inti- 
mately with their politics, became even 
more pronounced in this country, where 
they found themselves strangers in a 
strange land, and for a season were cut 
off from political activity because they 
had not yet acquired citizenship. We 
will, therefore, have considerable to say 
about the attitude of the refugees to- 
wards religion and the churches. 

The bitter enmity of the majority of 
the political immigrants, at least of those 
coming after 1848, to every kind of eccle- 
siastical organization was one of the main 
factors that have perpetuated the division 
mS the Germ a n p o pu la t i o n of the Un ited 
States into three distinct camps, approxi- 
mately of equal strength. These camps 
may be called those of the Catholics, the 


1 









































































































































4 


Lutherans and the Liberals. Although 
based primarily on differences of re- 
ligious belief or unbelief, this division 
pervades to a greater or less extent all 
relations of life, from ordinary business 
affairs to party politics, on the one hand, 
and social gatherings on the other. It is 
as noticeable to-day as it was fifty years 
ago, and persists to a considerable extent 
even among the second and third genera- 
tion of Germans in America. Of course 
it could not truthfully be said that the 
refugees created these divisions; but we 
shall find that they did much to empha- 
size and embitter them. The effects of 
these circumstances will form an im- 
portant part of our subject. 

The struggle for the abolition of 
slavery was the means of drawing the 
greater part of the refugees who came 
after 1848 away from their hopes of re- 
newed revolutions in the Fatherland, 
their anti-ecclesiastical warfare, and their 
dreams of an ideal state. Many of them 
threw themselves into that struggle with 
an ardor equal to that with which they 
had struggled for the freedom of their 
native country ten years before. The 
opportunity for useful and practical 
activity in the political field, which the 
anti-slavery agitation afforded, reacted 
favorably upon the refugees themselves. 
Most of them threw off some of their 
radicalism and adapted their views and 
purposes to act*\*l conditions. At the 
same time they became Americanized at 
a much more rapid rate than before. 
Having found something to do, on this 
side of the Atlantic, that was worth do- 
ing, they ceased to long for a renewal of 
revolutionary movements in Europe. 
When the slavery controversy and the 
etrH war which followed it had come to a 
triumphant close, not a few of the young 
revolutionists from the Rhine had be- 
come well-balanced, moderate, but pro- 
gressive men, entirely fit for the position 


of leadership which they continued to 
hold among large masses of their coun- 
trymen in the United States. 

In the eyes of a majority of the Ger- 
man element in this country, a certain 
glamor surrounds the memory of the 
“Forty-eighters,” a glamor which leads 
many Germans to over-estimate both the 
personal excellence and abilities of these 
men and their influence on the history of 
the United States. An unbiased judg- 
ment will declare that few of them pos- 
sessed more than a respectable mediocrity 
of talents. But at one critical juncture 
of our national history their influence act- 
ually dictated the direction of our devel- 
opment. The success of the Republican 
party in the Northwest was made possible 
because the “Forty-eighters” had suc- 
ceeded in winning a large proportion of 
Germans into its ranks. Without this 
element, Lincoln would probably not 
have been elected. Again, it was the in- 
fluence of the refugees that kept Mis- 
souri from joining the Confederacy. 
Here are two conspicuous instances of 
the work of these men, which make it 
imperative for the student to learn to 
understand them and their work if he 
would correctly understand the history 
of our politics. Their influence on the 
institutions of those states in which their 
power was most strongly exerted is even 
more profound, though less easily traced. 
Taking it all in all, their presence cannot 
be ignored in a complete and accurate 
survey of American history, no matter 
how carefully the investigator may guard 
against unjustified racial predilections. 


CHAPTER II. 


The Sources. 

The material for a monograph such as 

is attempted here must be gathered from 
a large number of scattered publications. 

mostly in the German language, and not. 












































































































5 


as a rule, easily accessible to the majority 
of students. As the subject consists not 
merely of definite acts of individuals and 
organized bodies, but to a considerable 
extent of tendencies, opinions, and what 
may be called the intellectual atmosphere 
in which the individuals had their being, 
it is not always easy to assign a definite 
source for each statement made. The 
resulting picture of the class of men de- 
scribed, in their relation to the general 
aspect of American history, is of the 
nature of a composite photograph, which 
will be the more accurate the greater the 
number of individuals from whom it is 
taken. 

There are two principal classes of pub- 
lications from which a notion of our sub- 
ject can be obtained. These are the 
newspapers published or edited in the 
United States by members of the refugee 
class, and the large number of books 
either written by them or in which their 
doings are more or less fully discussed. 
In addition to the newspapers proper, 
there are a few other periodicals which 
will furnish a large amount of material 
for our subject. One of the most im- 
portant of these is the monthly magazine 
“Atlantis,” which was published by 
Christian Essellen, a former member of 
the German parliament at Frankfurt. * 2 
It appeared, with some interruptions, 
during the years 1852 to 1858, its place 
of publication being successively Detroit, 
Milwaukee. Davenport, Cleveland arid 
Buffalo. It was really a high-class mag- 
azine, having for contributors many of 
the ablest Germans in the country. Natu- 
rally much space was devoted to the dis- 
cussion of subjects specially interesting 
to German-Americans. Leading edito- 


rials, particularly on political subjects, 
were mostly from the pen of Mr. Essel- 
len himself. An exceptionally valuable 
feature was the reviews of German- 
American newspapers and other publica- 
tions which appeared from time to time. 
In these will be found many notes on the 
smaller and more ephemeral publications 
and their editors, which are not to be 
found anywhere else. For most of the 
publications of this class have become 
quite inaccessible, and of many of them 
not even a single copy is known to exist, 
let alone complete files. Yet some of 
them would be of considerable interest 
because they were edited by men who 
later rose to prominence. A publication 
somewhat similar in scope to the " At- 
lantis ” but lighter in tone and more 
given to fiction and feuilleton is 
“Meyer's Monatshefte” published at 
New York. It contains occasional ar- 
ticles which throw interesting lights on 
the subject of this discussion. 

In the very long list of German books 
of travel in the United States during the 
period here considered there is hardly one 
in which some space is not given to the 
condition of the Germans in the country, 
and incidentally thereto many references 
to the political exiles and their doings 
appear. One of the most interesting of 
this class for present purposes was writ- 
ten by Moritz Busch 3 , under the title of 
“IVanderungen swischen Hudson und 
Mississippi It would be useless to at- 
tempt an enumeration of the large num- 
ber of books of this sort in which occa- 
sional notes have been found with refer- 
ence to the present subject. Some of the 
most important have been cited in foot 
notes. 


7 ' harv it H a mm , Wo t p h alia, in IK33, b e ca m e a me mb er -of the- extre m e 

Left in the Frankfort parliament, and died in an asylum for the incane in New York in May 
1859. See chapter IV. 

3) This is the Busch who later became well-known as Bismarck’s Boswell. He has 
published voluminous books of travel, as well as many magazine articles. 




















































































































6 


Not a few of the numerous Germans 
who at one time or another, during the 
period from 1820 to i860, had to go into 
exile for political reasons have published 
their recollections. But among these are 
unfortunately few who made their home 
in this country and took part in cis- 
Atlantic affairs. Still fewer have consid- 
ered their rather obscure work in' exile 
of as much importance to record as their 
more dramatic and conspicuous acts in 
the revolutionary movements of the 
Fatherland. But nevertheless the stu- 
dent should not neglect the memoirs even 
of those who never touched American 
soil, but spent their years in Switzerland, 
England or France. For in no other way 
can so clear a picture be gained of the 
typical characteristics of this class of 
men. Many of the things which strike 
one as remarkable among the refugees 
in America can be understood only by an 
insight into the life and character of the 
whole class, no matter where they had 
found a refuge, and who are free from 
the modifying influences of cis-Atlantic 
life. 

Among such works some of the most 
interesting and instructive may be men- 
tioned. One of these is by Ludwig Bam- 
berger 4 5 , who lived at Paris and after the 
amnesty returned to Germany, to become 
a leading figure in the parliamentary life 
of his native country. Another is writ- 
ten by a woman, Malvida v. Meysen- 
bug®, who was on intimate terms with 
many of the members of the exile colony 
in London. Her work is charmingly 


written and affords many glimpses into 
the private and familiar lives of the ex- 
iles, such as are rarely found in the writ- 
ings of men, who are preoccupied with 
matters political. 

Among the recollections which touch 
directly on American matters may be 
mentioned those of Julius Froebel, a 
leading member of the Frankfurt parlia- 
ment of 1848. He spent a number of 
years in the United States without ever 
making this country his permanent home. 
After he had become reconciled with the 
German authorities he returned to his na- 
tive land and rose to considerable political 
and official eminence. Among his nu- 
merous writings the two works men- 
tioned in the note are of the greatest in- 
terest for the present purpose 6 . Very in- 
teresting are the recollections of Hein- 
rich Boemstein 7 , which appeared origin- 
ally in various German newspapers, espe- 
cially the “Westliche Post” of St. Louis 
and “Der IVesten” of Chicago, but were 
afterwards published in book form 8 ^ 

One of the most interesting volumes of 
this sort, and in some respects a literary 
curiosity, is an autobiography by Charles 
G. Reemelin of Cincinnati. Mr. Reeme- 
lin (originally spelled Ruemelin) was a 
native of Heilbronn, Wuerttemberg, and 
came to the United States in 1832, barely 
20 years old. He was not, strictly speak- 
ing, a political refugee, but left his native 
country in consequence of a widespread 
movement which had originated in politi- 
cal discontent, as will appear in the next 
chapter. In his new home he acquired a 


4) Erinnerungen von Ludwig Bamberger. Herausgegeben von Paul Nathan. Berlin, 
Georg Rainer, 1880. 

5) Memoiren einer Idealistin, von Malvida v. Meysenbug. Schuster & Loeffler, 
Berlin und Leipzig. 5th edition, 1900. 3 volumes. 

6) Aua Amerika. Erfahrungen, Reisen und Studien. 2 volumes. Leipzig, 1850. 

Ein LebenalauL_ Stuttgart, 1890 2 v o lume s 

r) Heinrich Boemstein was forced to leave his native country and thereafter for a 
while published an extremely radical paper at Paris. After the coup d’etat by Napoleon he 
came to the United States. He served with distinction in the civil war. 

8 ) Boemstein, Fiinfundsiebenzig JTahre in der alten und neuen Welt. 2 volumes, 1881. 


























































































































7 


comfortable fortune and became a politi- 
cian of considerable local importance. In 
"his old age he published the story of his 
life, in a quaint English style which reads 
like a literal translation from the Ger- 
man. The little book is very entertain- 
ing because of the frank egotism of its 
author, who evidently deems the smallest 
detail of his business or private life of as 
much interest as the weightiest public 
question. For this very reason the book 
furnishes much valuable material. The 
marry persons with whom Mr. Reemelin 
came into opposition during a long pub- 
lic career seem to him to have been in- 
variably villains of the deepest dye. The 
author has written a number of other 
books, and frequently contributed to both 
German and English newspapers in this 
country 9 . 

There are a few books that treat ex- 
pressly of the history of the German ele- 
ment in the United States, and in which 
much material will be found concerning 
the subjects of the present discussion. 
These books were founded on original 
investigation, and as the material col- 
lected by their authors, so far as it was 
unpublished, has disappeared, or is at 
least not accessible, the books of this 
class must he considered as primary evi- 
dence in the same sense m which Livy is 
a primary source of Roman history. 
Among these books the most valuable is 
Koerner’s “Das Deutsche Element in den 
Vcreinigten Staaten” 10 . Its author was 
one of the most eminent Germans who 
ever lived in the United States. Coming 
to this country in 1833, at the age of 22, 
after having been concerned in the 
Frankfurt riots of that year, he became 


a lawyer in Belleville, Illinois. In 1845 
he was elected a justice of the Supreme 
Court of his adopted state. In 1852 he 
became lieutenant governor; he joined 
the Republican party upon its organiza- 
tion, organized the Forty-third Illinois 
Volunteer Infantry and was appointed 
colonel on General Fremont’s staff, be- 
came minister to Spain under Lincoln, 
and was a Grant elector in 1868. His 

book covers the period from 1818 to 1848 
* 

and seems to have been intended, in part, 
to remove the impression that nothing 
worth mentioning had been done by Ger- 
mans in this country between the days 
of the Revolutionary War and the com- 
ing of the “Forty-eighters.” This notion 
was at one time widely prevailing, as a 
result of the rivalries between the latter 
element and the older German leaders 
(See infra, Chapter V). Mr. Koemer’s 
book is the result of a great amount of 
personal correspondence, and is full of 
valuable biographical matter on a great 
number of prominent Germans in all 
parts of the country. 

Another valuable work of this class is 
Franz v. Loeher’s “Gcschichtc und Zu - 
staende der Deuts'chen in Amerika” * 11 . 
This was really the first attempt to write 
a history of the Germans in the United 
States, from the days of Pastorius down. 
But the larger part of the book is taken 
up with a review of the “Zustaende” 
rather than the “Gtschickte” and is based 
largely on the personal observations of 
the writer. The latter spent two years 
in the country as a traveler and visitor 
rather than an immigrant. After his re- 
turn to Europe he became a professor in 
the universities of Goettingen and Mu- 


9) Life of Charles Reemelin, in German: Carl Gustav Ruemelin. From 1814 to 1892, 
written b y hims e lf , in Cin c innat i, be t wee n 1-099 and 1902-. Cincinnati , -Weter St Dalke t, 
printers, 356 Walnut Street, 1892. 

10 ) Das deutsche Element in den Vereinigten Staaten von Nord-Amerika, 1818—1848. 
Von Gustav Koemer. Cincinnati, A. E. Wilde A Co., 1880. 

11) Cincinnati und Leipeig, 1847. 2nd edition, Goettingen 1855. 





































































































































































8 


nich, and wrote numerous books on travel 
and allied subjects, as well as some poet- 
ical work». 

A third volume belonging to this class 
is “In der Neuen Heimath” 12 . Its editor 
and principal contributor is Anton Eick- 
hoff, late a representative in Congress 
from New York. Among other contrib- 
utors are the late Oswald Seidensticker, 
of Pennsylvania; H. A. Rattem^apn, of 
Ohio, and P. V. Deuster, of Wisconsin. 
The volume is less exclusively biograph- 
ical than Koerner’s book, but contains 
many facts drawn from the personal rec- 
ollections of the contributors. 

Biographical notes regarding men of 
prominence that do not come within the 
period covered by Koerner are apt to be 
found in “Schem’s Deutsch-Amerikan- 
isches Conversations-Lexikon ” 13 , to 
which a number of the best German- 
American writers have contributed. 

The fifteen volumes of the “Deutsche 
Pionier ” 14 will furnish some material, al- 
though it is quite noticeable that the sub- 
ject we are dealing with here is not a 
favorite with the contributors, to that 
publication. There is far more to be 
found in the " Pionier ” concerning the 
older periods than the time covered by 
this monograph. Very likely the doings 
of the political refugees may have seemed 
too recent for historical treatment. Many 
of the contributors to this little magazine 
were themselves of the refugee class, and 
it is to be regretted that more of them 
have not considered it worth while to 
publish their recollections of their early 
days in the adopted country, and espe- 
cially of their and their friends’ partici- 
pation in the struggle against slavery. 


It should be observed that none of 
these attempts at a historical treatment 
of the German element have special ref- 
erence to the particular class of immi- 
grants with which we are concerned. But 
the members of that class have furnished 
so large a portion of the leaders of their 
nationality in this country that a history 
of the German element must of neces- 
sity deal to a very large extent with po- 
litical refugees. 

In addition to the works just men- 
tioned, a number of local histories will be 
drawn upon by every student of the sub- 
ject. Such histories, among others, are 
Rudolf A. Koss, “Milwaukee” ; Stierlin, 
“Der Staat Kentucky und die Stadt 
Louisville” ; Schnake, “Geschichte der 
Deutchen Presse in St. Louis” 

A series of writings by various men 
belonging to the “Forty-eighters,” which 
throw considerable light on the mental 
attitude of that class of men towards 
American institutions before they had be- 
come somewhat acclimated, is known as 
the “Atlantische Studien ” 15 . Among the 
contributors to this collection Friedrich 
Kapp is easily the most important. This 
writer is best known as the biographer 
of Generals Steuben and DeKalb, and 
one of the pioneers in the study of Ger- 
man-American history during the colo- 
nial period. He lived in the United 
States from 1850 to 1870, took an active 
part in the early history of the Repub- 
lican party, was a Lincoln elector in 
i860, and held the office of immigration 
commissioner for the state of New York. 
But he never ceased to be a European at 
heart and finally returned to his native 
country. His voluminous writings have 


12) In der Neuen Heimath. Geschichtliche Mittheilungen iiber die deutschen Einwan- 
derer in alien Theilen der Union. Herausgegeben von Anton Eickhoff, New York, 1884. 

13 ) New York, 11 volumes. 1869 to 1874. 

H) A mommy magazine devoted to German-American history, edited by Henry A. 
Rattermann, at Cincinnati, between 1869 and 1884. 

15 ) Atlantische Studien von Deutschen in Amerika. 8 volumes, Goettingen, 1853 
to 1855. 
































































































9 


avowedly for their principal object the 
strengthening of the liberal and national 
sentiment in Germany, and his views of 
American events and institutions must be 
considered with that qualification in 
mind. Although Kapp never became an 
American at heart, he got rid quicker 
than most of his colleagues of those rad- 
ical and impracticable extravagances 
which during a number of years distin- 
guished the majority of the refugees of 
1848 (See infra, Chapter IV). The wri- 
tings of Kapp which are most important 
for the purpose of learning the mental 
attitude of the German Republican- lead- 
ers of the ante bellum period, ui which 
they are in most respects typical are the 
following : “Die Politik der V er Staaten 
unter Praesident Pierce ” in Atlantische 
Studien, Vol. Ill, page 1 ; “Die Politi- 
schen Parteicn in den Ver. Staaten /' At- 
lantische Studien, Vol. I, page 81 : “Die 
Sklavenfragc in den Ver. Staaten ge- 
schichtlich entwickclt,” Goettingen, 1854 
(appeared at first serially in Atl. Studien, 
Vols. V to VIIl) ; this work was later 
extended and republished under the title 
“Geschichte der Sklavcrei in den Verei- 
nigten Staaten” Hamburg, 1861. A valu- 
able characterization of Friedrich Kapp, 
with, a bibliography of his writings, has 
appeared in the “Deutsch-Amerikanische 
Magazin,” Vol. I, page 16, by the pen of 
the editor, H. A. Rattermann 1 ®. 

The sometimes rather extravagant do- 
ings of the refugees attracted the atten- 
tion of “knownothings” during the per- 
iod when that and other organizations 
hostile to foreigners flourished, and oc- 
casional notes regarding them may be 
found in publications of that character. 
These publications are all of a bitterly 
partisan tone and accuracy of statement 


regarding the enemy need not be ex- 
pected of them. A few typical know- 
nothing books may be mentioned here, 
as some of them have been cited occa- 
sionally in this monograph. 

John P. Sanderson published “Repub- 
lican Landmarks; Views of American 
Statesmen on Foreign Immigration” 17 . 
The object of the book is stated to be 
“to give the opinions of others, not the 
author’s own.” But the promise is not 
adhered to. In default of better mate- 
rial the volume may be of some use, be- 
cause it prints translations of some of 
the platforms and manifestoes of the 
Radicals, notably the program adopted 
by the “Freie Deutsche ” organization at 
Louisville in 1854 (page 219). How 
well informed the author is regarding 
the men about whom he writes may be 
judged from the fact that on the same 
page he apparently confounds Carl 
Heinzen with Heinrich Heine. 

A book of the same type is “Immigra- 
tion ; Its Evils and Consequences,” by 
S. C. Busey, M. D. 18 The learned doc- 
tor’s accuracy becomes evident from the 
difficulty he has with German names. 
On page 32 he spells the German orator 
from Texas, Wipprecht, first “Wip- 
pretcht,” and afterwards “Whiptretch,” 
calling it naively “a real jaw-breaking 
German name.” Kinkel appears repeat- 
edly as “Kinkle.” In blissful ignorance 
of the relation between German and 
Dutch, he delights in giving honest 
“High Dutch” citizens the appellation 
“Mynheer” 

There is a very large number of books 
from which occasional notes regarding 
the subject in hand may be culled. Many 
of them have been cited in the footnotes 
to this essay. Of hitherto unpublished 


Of this excellent quarterly one volume only appeared. (Cincinnati, 188(1.) Its con- 
tents deal principally with the colonial and revolutionary periods. 

17 ) Philadelphia, J. B. Lippincott & Co., 1850. 

18) New York, DeWitt & Davenport, 1850. 








































































































































10 


manuscript material the writer has had 
the opportunity to use nothing except 
the letter of Carl Schurz which is found 
in footnote 90 to this essay. But in this 
connection attention should be called to 
the fact that with events and men so re- 
cent as those treated here there is a cer- 
tain amount of knowledge to be gained 
from personal intercourse with those who 
have known those men personally. This 
sort of traditional knowledge is too 
vague to be trustworthy with regard to 
definite facts and dates. But it has some 
value for the purpose of obtaining a 
true notion of the general characteristics 
of men and events, and sometimes cor- 
rects inaccurate impressions apt to be 
received from written accounts. Of 
such traditional knowledge the writer 
has acquired a fair share and tried to 
make use of it in order to make his pic- 
ture of the political refugees as true as 
possible ; at the same time he has taken 
honest care not to let a personal bias be 
created thereby which might distort the 
historical perspective. 


CHAPTER III. 


Before the Year 1848. 

The years following the overthrow of 
Napoleon are, for the people of Ger- 
many, a period to which they cannot 
look back with anything but dissatisfac- 
tion, so far as political life is concerned. 
The time of the foreign oppression had 
helped to revive the feeling of German 
nationality that had been almost choked 
to death under the crumbling rubbish 
heap of the Holy Roman Empire'. The 
succeeding War of Liberation had given 
that national sentiment a tremendous 
impetus, and for a briet period the 
masses, especially in North Germany, 
had been raised to a height of enthusi- 
asm and patriotic self-devotion such as 


occurs but at long intervals in the his- 
tory of any people. But as soon as Nap- 
oleon had been defeated and the French 
left the soil of the Fatherland a reaction 
began. The recollection of the Corsican 
despot began to retreat into the back- 
ground of men’s consciousness, and its 
place was taken by that of Robespierre 
and the Jacobins. A wave of reaction 
from the revolutionary fever swept 
throughout Europe, and both the gov- 
ernments and the masses in Germany 
felt its full force. Both had but one de- 
sire, tranquillity at any price. It was the 
era of the Holy Alliance, the purpose of 
which was to keep things in exactly the 
condition in which they were put by the 
Congress of Vienna. 

The current Liberalism of Germany 
has been inclined to represent the mat- 
ter as if this quietistic tendency had be- 
longed to the governments only, and had 
been forcibly imposed upon the^German 
people. But a slight acquaintance wLh 
the period must convince an unbiased 
student that the contrary is true. The 
great mass of the people were for a 
while entirely satisfied with the system 
of guardianship under which Prince 
Metternich, the leading statesman of the 
Holy Alliance, kept them. The 'truth 
was, the great majority of Germans 
were not interested in public affairs. 
They left those things to their Kings and 
Grand Dukes, and to the officials who 
were paid to attend to them. They 
themselves attended to their private 
affairs, or, if they were intellectually in- 
clined, took a share in the grand philo- 
sophical, scientific and literary activity 
which in this as in the preceding gen- 
eration absorbed the greater part of the 
best intellects. There was no public life, 
no speechmaking, no popular elections, 
hardly any political journalism. This 
was especially true of the two great ab- 
solute governments, Austria and Prussia, 























































































































































11 


Tiaraly less so of the minor startes, in 
which there existed various kinds of 
representative institutions of more or 
less antiquated pattern. The fact alone 
that most of those local Diets met be- 
hind closed doors, and newspaper re- 
ports of their proceedings were prohib- 
ited, made a true political life of the peo- 
ple impossible 19 . 

Yet it was not to be expected that 
among a great and cultivated nation the 
seed of political liberty, which the 
French revolution had scattered broad- 
cast over the world, should not meet 
some ardent souls in .which it could find 
a congenial field. Nor was it strange that 
such receptive hearts were found espe- 
cially among the educated youth. Among 
those men who had labored for the re- 
generation of Germany in the days of 
the French occupation, university pro- 
fessors had been conspicuous: Fichte, 
Luden, Fries, Oken. Some of these, 
after the War, formed a center of Lib- 
eralism at the University of Jena, where 
the Grand Duke Karl August, by far 
the noblest among the German princes 
of the time, gave them all the support it 
was in his power to give. Through the 
influence of these men and others of 
similar tendencies at other universities 
there sprang up among the students a 
movement for the improvement of the 
educated youth in their moral and intel- 
lectual lives, which crystallized itself in 
the organization of the students’ soci- 
ety known as the “Deutsche Burschen- 
schaft.” This was not at its beginning, 
and never really became, properly a po- 
litical movement. The declared objects 
were the fostering of high moral ideas, of 
patriotism and a truly scientific (“wissen- 


schaftlich”) spirit among its members. 
The atmosphere prevailing in it was that 
of an ardent, impracticable, somewhat 
vague enthusiasm, just such a spirit as 
one might expect among persons of the 
adolescent age. The comprehension of 
political affairs, among the great mass 
of these youths, was about as mature as 
that of an average American schoolboy. 

Within this innocent organization, 
however, there was an unorganized nu- 
cleus of young men, among whom Karl 
Follenius (Charles Theodore Follen) 
and his brothers, Adolph and Paul, were 
the leading spirits, whose aim was more 
definitely political. They had no more 
practical understanding of politics than 
the rest. But while others were satis- 
fied to dream about the ancient glories 
of the German race, sing patriotic songs 
and wear the absurd dress which the 
faddists of the hour called “alt-deutsch,” 
this inner circle was anxious to do 
something to restore the former splendor 
of uermany. Their aims were as vague 
as possible. Some believed in a Ger- 
man republic; others wanted to restore 
the empire ; some wanted to do away 
with tne federal feature of the German 
constitution ; more meant to preserve the 
federal principle, but desired to 
strengthen the central authority ; all 
united in condemning the constitution of 
the German Confederacy, as it had come 
out of the hands of the Congress of 
Vienna, and in this sentiment at least 
they were entirely right. None of them 
had a clear conception of the means to 
bring about whatever political change 
they desired. Although a great deal has 
been written about these matters, our 
actual knowledge of the aim and acts of 


^ »» Aber Ttn war Mfgends eltte geschlossene Parte i zunnden, da gab es keine Geseil- 
schaft, St&nde und Klassen, die die offentliche Meinung zu bffentlicher Rede gebracht h&tten ; 
der Beamtenstand fdrchtete und mied die Presse; der Adel arbeitete im Stillen fur sich und 
seine Sonderzwecke, die das Licht des Tages scheuten; der Biirgerstand harrte in gewtrtra- 
tem Schweigen.” Gervinus, Geschichte des neumehnten Jahrhunderts, Band 2, p. 359. 









































































































12 


this group of “Blacks/' or “Absolutes," 
as they were called, is exceedingly vague, 
for the reason, undoubtedly, that there 
was nothing definite to record. 

On the 1 8th of October, 1817, the 
Deutsche Burschenschaft met at the lit- 
tle town of Eisenach, hallowed by recol- 
lections of Martin Luther, to celebrate 
the 300th anniversary of the Reforma- 
tion. A part of the ceremonies was the 
kindling of a bonfire on an adjacent hill, 
opposite the historic Wartburg, where 
a number of speeches were made. These 
were of a religious and patriotic nature, 
but hardly contained a definite political 
allusion. When the official program 
was over, a number of students carried 
in a basket full of books. Their titles 
were read, and it appeared that they 
were writings considered unpatriotic by 
the students. With some more or less 
enthusiastic, but very far from incen- 
diary speeches, these books were con- 
signed to the flames. Among the stu- 
dents taking active parts in this bur- 
lesque auto-da-fe were Robert and Wil- 
liam Wesselhoeft. Both of these were 
some years later forced into exile, the 
former after having been incarcerated a 
number of years for alleged seditious 
acts, and both became distinguished phy- 
sicians in New England. 

The German governments, and more 
particularly Prince Metternich, had for 
some time watched the doings of the 
Burschenschaft with a jealous eye. The 
incident of Eisenach intensified this sen- 
timent, although for the time being 
nothing was done to suppress the move- 
ment. A vigorous feud between the 
Liberals and the supporters of the gov- 
ernments broke out, and for a while 


pamphlets about the Eisenach celebra- 
tion followed each other thick and fast. 
It is characteristic of the absurd nerv- 
ousness of the Metternich government 
that these boyish pranks were consid- 
ered dangerous to existing institutions. 
It is equally characteristic of the views 
at that time prevailing in Germany re- 
garding popular participation in public 
affairs that even the great Stein, him- 
self a distinguished reformer and a hero 
in the eyes of these very youths, bitterly 
condemned the doings of the Burschen- 
schaft. 

But it was an occurrence of far more 
serious character which brought about 
the persecutions that sent the first wave 
of political exiles from Germany to the 
United States. August von Kotzebue, a 
mediocre writer of great notoriety, one 
of whose plays (in its English version 
known as “The Stranger") was long 
immensely popular on all the stages of 
Europe, was by many people considered 
a spy of the Russian government. On 
March 23, 1819, he was stabbed to death, 
at his home in Mannheim, by Karl Sand, 
a student, a member of the Burschen- 
schaft and a close friend of Karl Follen. 
The assassin was imbued with an almost 
insane enthusiasm, with a mystical re- 
ligious zeal, and undoubtedly acted un- 
der a mistaken notion of patriotic duty. 
On the part of the Liberals there was a 
tendency to excuse his deed, and to sym- 
pathize with him personally 20 . This 
crime was the occasion or pretext for 
severe measures of repression on the 
part of the Metternich government 
against what few traces of political in- 
terest there were among the German 
people. At a conference held in Carls- 
bad the representatives of the two great 


20) Varnhagen tells how, when the news of the murder became known, the populace at 
Mannheim made demonstrations in Sand’s favor, and the murderer was even praised as a 
martyr, “especially by the numerous Englishmen and Englishwomen who were at Mannheim 
at the time.” K. A. Varnhagen v. Ense, Denkwiirdigkeiten des eigenen Lebens, vol. C, p. 82* 
















































































































13 


powers, Austria and Prussia, agreed on 
a program which they forced upon the 
lesser states of the confederacy, much 
against the will of sofrie of them. A 
severe censorship of the press was es- 
tablished, and a special commission, with 
ill-defined but very extensive powers, 
was established to investigate “dema- 
gogical intrigues” (demagogische Um- 
triebe). This commission, during ten 
years, harrassed and persecuted every- 
body suspected of liberal leanings, with 
an utter disregard of justice and even 
common sense, worthy of the most tyr- 
annical days of the Russian “Third Sec- 
tion.” Members of the Burschenschaft 
found themselves proscribed ; youths of 
twenty who had never committed worse 
things than to sing bombastic songs 
about a mysterious abstraction they 
called Liberty, or wearing the tricolored 
ribbons of the Burschenschatt (black, 
red and gold), were kept in prison for 
years, often without ever being tried on 
specific charges. Men of high standing, 
who had been among the leaders in the 
popular rising of 1813, and had deserved 
well not only of their country, but of 
the sovereign princes who now perse- 
cuted them, men such as Jahn, Arndt, 
Goerres, fared no better than the stu- 
dents ; even Stein the greatest and 
noblest of the German statesmen of the 
time, did not escape annoyance. As a 
result many of the ablest and best young 
men of the country were forced to seek 
safety in foreign lands. Switzerland, 
France, the Netherlands, and especially 
England, offered a more or less secure 
refuge to the exiles. Some -of them, 
however, resolved to shake the dust of 
the old world from their feet, and thus 
the political refugee became for the first 


time an element in the German immi- 
gration to the United States. 

The men belonging to the class we 
have just described were few, compared 
to the hosts of refugees who came after 
the revolutionary movements of 1830 
and 1848. They came, moreover, at a 
time when the immigrated German ele- 
ment was not yet of much importance 
in this country. As a consequence, these 
exiles very soon lost themselves in the 
native American population, entered 
fully into the American life, and exerted 
what influence they had on our history, 
not by virtue of being Germans, but of 
being able and worthy men. They are, 
therefore, hardly a part of our present 
subject, and perhaps all that is required 
in this place is to mention a few of those 
who afterwards rose to distinction. 

Facile princeps of these, and perhaps 
of all Germans who ever lived in the 
United States, is Francis Lieber, whose 
work as a publicist is known to every 
student of American scholarship. Next 
to him comes Karl Follen, who arrived 
in Cambridge in 1825, to become pro- 
fessor of German in Harvard. He after- 
wards was a Unitarian minister, and a 
zealous anti-slavery orator. His friend 
Karl Beck, who came in the same vessel 
with him, also obtained a chair in Har- 
vard University. The brothers Wessel- 
hoeft have already been mentioned. 
Friedrich List, the poetical economist 
and advocate of protectionism, lived a 
number of years in Pennsylvania, after 
having been sentenced to ten years' im- 
prisonment and pardoned. He after- 
wards was United States consul, first at 
Hamburg, afterwards at Leipsic, and 
never returned to America. Dr. Edward 
Rivinus 21 became a distinguished physi- 


21 ) Rivinus was the first to publish a quarterly magazine, such as afterwards became 
common, for the express puipose of acquainting Europeans with American affairs. An ex- 
cellent sketch of this distinguished Philadelphian is found in Rattermann’t Deutsch-Ameri- 
kanisches Magazin, page 327. 















































































































14 


cian and philanthropist at Philadelphia. 
William Lehmann, who had escaped 
from the fortress at Julich by the aid of 
the son of the commanding officer, whose 
tutor he was, became professor of an- 
cient languages in the University of 
Georgia, but afterwards settled on a 
farm in Wisconsin. Many others with 
similar careers might be mentioned. 

The indirect effects of measures for 
the repression of a popular movement 
are often of far greater importance than 
the direct ones, and, moreover, are apt 
to be of a character quite unexpected to 
the promoters. This happened in the 
case of Mettemich and his persecution of 
“demagogues.” The injustice done to 
so many of the best young men of the 
country led numbers who would other- 
wise have been content to live on with- 
out a thought of political affairs to be- 
come discontented. This was the case 
especially in the Southern states, Baden, 
Wurtemberg, Bavaria and Hesse-Darm- 
stadt, where there were at least traces of 
participation in public affairs by the 
people.^ But although, during the third 
decade of the century, political dissatis- 
faction spread rapidly from the univer- 
sities throughout the educated middle 
class, the Metternich system prevented 
all open manifestations, and to many 
minds all chance of improvement seemed 
cut off. 

Under these circumstances not a few 
educated and well-to-do people began to 
cast their eyes across the Atlantic, in the 
hope that there they could find a coun- 
try which was more in accord with their 
political aspirations than the Fatherland, 
Emigration to the United States had as- 
sumed very considerable proportions 
after the peace of 1815, largely on ac- 
count of the business depression prevail- 
ing for a number of years. But this 


class of emigrants, moved entirely by 
economic reasons, and recruited mostly 
from the poorer class of country people, 
does not particularly concern us at pres 
ent 22 . The new political emigration, in 
contrast with the refugees proper of 
whom we have spoken above, did not 
readily disappear in the native popula- 
tion. They came in more or less closely 
organized groups and bodies, and al- 
most always settled on the lands beyond 
the Alleghanies, very much like their 
poorer countrymen, although with far 
less prospect of making a success of 
their attempt at pioneering. The organ- 
izing of colonization societies is a char- 
acteristic of this period. Scores of them 
sprang up all over Germany. Many of 
them had no political object in view. 
Some of them had a strongly religious 
tinge. But some, and those are the only 
ones interesting us at present, were of 
a decidedly political character. The£ in- 
tended to be the nucleus of a new Ger- 
many in the Mississippi Valley. They 
wanted to form German states, which 
might or might not be parts of the 
North American Union, but in which the 
German nationality should be predom- 
inant, where German should oe the lan- 
guage of business, school and govern- 
ment, where a purely German culture 
should flourish under the beneficent pro- 
tection of free institutions such as these 
men despaired of ever seeing established 
in the Fatherland. 

This dream of a German state or 
group of states haunted the imagina- 
tion of many educated Germans for a 
generation. To us of the present day it 
seems an absurdity which at first appears 
to prove an utter lack of political in- 
sight in those who entertained it. But 
our latter-da v wisdom largely CQme^ 
from an experience which these German 


38) See Loeher, Geschichte und Zust&nde, page 250 and passim. 






















































IS 


dreamers necessarily lacked. They can- 
not be blamed for underestimating the 
assimilative capacity of the American 
people, and the solving force of Amer- 
ican institutions. Americans themselves 
were very far from knowing their 
strength in this regard. When the num- 
ber of Germans and other foreigners 
flocking to our shores increased to many 
thousands, year after year; when large 
districts were almost exclusively settled 
by Germans, in the manner in which 
large districts in New York, Pennsyl- 
vania and other colonies had been Ger- 
man a century before, not a few Amer- 
icans began to fear that there was a 
danger of such German states springing 
up, and they had good excuse for their 
apprehensions. Next to their pardon- 
able underestimate of American assimi- 
lative strength, these German patriots 
made their most serious mistake in imag- 
ining that by mere private enterprise, 
without the support of a strong home 
government, a German colony could be 
established, especially on territory which, 
though still unsettled, was nevertheless 
under the undisputed dominion of a 
strong and jealous government. 

The plans, more or less thoroughly 
digested, which were usually proposed 
for accomplishing these projects, did not 
lack plausibility, especially to people in 
Germany who had no knowledge of local 
conditions. They were, in brief, the' 
concentration of German immigrants in 
one or more of the Western states. The 
large measure of self-government which 
American political principles guaranteed 
to states and minor civil divisions was 
to be used to further these ends. After 
the Germans should have obtained a vot- 
ing majority in a state, what constitu- 
tional nower could prevent 4 hat major - 


ity from making German the official lan- 
guage of its government, and otherwise 
remodeling its institutions to suit Ger- 
man notions? The bolder ones among 
these dreamers did not stop there. They 
would have the government of the 
United States itself bi-lingual, in the 
manner in which you may use either 
German or French in the Swiss Repub- 
lic, or English or French in some parts 
of Canada ; and if the Americans would 
not grant this— why, then the German 
states would secede and set up a national 
government of their own. Anyway, in 
Europe it was taken for granted, at that 
time, that the North American Union 
would sooner or later split up into ai 
number of separate confederacies. 

No support whatever was given to* 
these ideas by government authority. 
The shadowy central government at 
Frankfurt never concerned itself about 
these affairs, except that early in its 
career it sanctioned the publication of a 
report by Baron Fuerstenwaerther, who 
had been sent by Herr v. Gagern, the 
representative of the Netherlands at the 
Bundesrath, to investigate the condition 
of German immigrants to the United 
States 23 . The smaller states had no 
means to do anything ; and the two great 
powers had no desire to engage in ad- 
venture across the sea. All the govern- 
ments disliked emigration, and occasion- 
ally threw some slight obstacles in its. 
way. In Prussia, the minister, v. Eich- 
horn, in 1845, proposed that it should 
be made the duty of Prussian consuls 
to see that emigrants settled in continu- 
ous bodies, and that the home govern- 
ment should aid in the establishment of 
German churches and schools 24 . Noth- 
ing came of this proposal, and this is 
about the whole ex te nt to whic h the 


23) Fuerstenwaerther, Moritz v. • Der Deutsche in Nord-Amerika. Stuttgart and Tue- 
bingen, Cotta 1818. 

24) See Treitschke, Deutsche Geschichte, V, page 492. 




‘ • 










































































































































16 


German governments concerned them- 
selves with their expatriated citizens in 
the United States. 

These desires for a German state were 
found exclusively among the educated 
minority. The great mass of the Ger- 
man immigrants never interested them- 
selves in things of this sort. But a very 
large proportion of the educated Ger- 
mans coming to this country, during the 
period before 1848, came distinctly with 
such objects in view. 

Among the influences which led to 
this movement one of the most impor- 
tant ones was a little book by a young 
physician, Dr. Gottfried Duden, who had 
spent a few years in Montgomery 
County, now Warren County, Mis- 
souri 25 . It was written in a lively style, 
and presented such a rosy picture of the 
pleasures of pioneer life, of sport with 
rod and gun in the primeval woods and 
waters of the West, and of the glowing 
prospects of the settlers, that the imag- 
inations of thousands of young and not 
a few middle-aged men were set rioting 
in dreams of Western adventure. The 
consequence was a large increase of emi- 
gration on the part of educated people, 
who were often possessed of consider- 
able means, and were deeply dissatisfied 
with the social and political conditions 
of their homes. Dudens’ influence was 
particularly strong in Southwest Ger- 
many and along the Rhine. It is very 
noticeable that most of the class of immi- 
grants with which we are dealing came 
from these portions of the Fatherland. 
But there were, of course, other factors 
to bring about that circumstance. The 
most important of these was that no- 
where was political dissatisfaction so 
strong and widely spread. This was not 


because conditions were worse here than 
elsewhere in Germany, but because they 
were better. Here alone was there at 
least a semblance of popular participa- 
tion in public affairs; consequently the 
interest of people in politics had been 
aroused, while in the North and East it 
was still slumbering. 

The full strength of these influences 
upon immigration was not felt until the 
fourth decade of the century, but the 
preparatory stage was during the pre- 
ceding ten years. During that period, 
from the Carlsbad Resolutions to the fall 
of the Bourbons in France, the Metter- 
nich system of tranquillity at any price 
seemed to be completely triumphant. 
But under the surface matters ripened 
towards a sudden change. The events 
of July, 1830, in Paris found an echo in 
Germany. There were riots in various 
places, and with surprising ease the gov- 
ernments of the small states of the North 
were prevailed on to change their me- 
diaeval constitutions into something more 
modern, and thereby come into line with 
the states of the South. Only the two 
great powers and the two Mecklenburgs 
still remained without popular repre- 
sentative bodies. From this time forth 
political agitation never ceased again in 
Germany. At the same time the oppo- 
sition parties became more radical, espe- 
cially in the Southwest, until at the end 
of the period with which we are dealing 
there was a strong party that would be 
content with nothing but an ultra-demo- 
cratic republic. The governments soon 
became alarmed, and tried renewed 
measures of repression, with the usual 
result of increasing the strength of op- 
position. In 1832 the Burschenschaft, 
which had shown renewed activity for 


35) Gottfried Duden, Bericht iiber eine Reise nach den westlichen Staaten Nord-Ame- 
ika*» und einen mehrjahrigen Aufenthalt am Missouri (in den Jahren 1824, 182.5, 1826 und 
1827) in Besug auf Auswanderung und Uebervolkerung. Elberfeld, 1829. 2nd edition, 
Cotta 1818. 












































































































17 


some years past, openly declared in favor 
of bringing about the liberty and unity 
of Germany by revolution. On May 
2 7, 1832, a mass meeting, in which 25,- 
000 men are said to have participated, 
was held at Hambach, and speeches of 
a pronouncedly radical character were 
made. The year following, a conspiracy 
to revolutionize the country was discov- 
ered in Stuttgart, at the head of which 
stood a lieutenant in the army, Ernst 
Ludwig Koseritz, who had succeeded in 
winning many of his fellow officers to 
his projects 26 . About the same time a 
mob captured the guardhouse at Frank- 
furt, only to be dispersed by the federal 
garrison. The immediate result of these 
and similar ill-devised risings was that 
the prisons and fortresses were again 
filled with political convicts and sus- 
pects, and a new wave of refugees was 
thrown across the Atlantic. These were 
the conditions under which numbers of 
political malcontents organized those 
colonization societies to help in founding 
in the Far West a new Germany, which 
was to enjoy those blessings of liberty 
that were lacking in the old country 
Of all these societies, the best known, 
and, perhaps, the most important, and 
certainly the one with the most pro- 
nounced political character, is the “Gies- 
sener Auswanderungs-Gesellschaft. ,, It 
was organized, originally, by a num- 
ber of university men at Giessen, among 
whom Prof. Vogt was conspicuous, the 
father of Karl Vogt, who afterwards be- 
came famous as a scientist at Geneva. 


Another leading member was Paul Fol- 
len, a younger brother of the Karl Fol- 
len whom we mentioned above. In the 
prospectus issued in 1833, the objects of 
the association were stated to be: “The 
founding of a German state, which 
would, of course, have to be a member 
of the United States, but with mainte- 
nance of a form of government which 
will assure the continuance of German 
custom, German language, and create a 
genuine, free and popular ( volksthuem - 
liches) life.” The intention was to oc- 
cupy an unsettled and unorganized ter- 
ritory, “in order that a German republic, 
a rejuvenated Germany, may arise in 
North America” 27 . The members of the 
society were recruited from the very best 
elements of the German people. They 
were all possessed of some means. Many 
of them held high rank in official and 
professional life. The emigrants sailed 
from Bremen to New Orleans in two 
vessels. Their original intention was to 
settle in Arkansas. But no sooner had 
they landed when they split up. Instead 
of settling in a body, they followed the 
example of practically all other immi- 
grants. Each selected for himself a new 
home where it seemed best to him. Few 
went to Arkansas. Man y went to Mis- 
souri, and particularly In the neighbor- 
hood of Dudcn’s farm — now aban- 
doned 28 . Others settled in Illinois, es- 
pecially near Belleville. Still others 
scattered throughout the West and 
Southwest. Paul Follen, the leader, 
bought land in Warren County, Mis- 


26) Koseritr was sentenced to death hut pardoned on condition of leaving his country. 
He came to Philadelphia. On his further career, and his service in the Seminole war, see 
Koemer, Das Deutsche Element, page 04. 

27) See ,, Aufforderung und Erklarung in BetrefT einer Auswanderung im Grossen aus 
Deutschland in die Nord-Amerikanischen Freistaaten. ” Giessen, 1833. Also Koerner, Op. 

cit , pag e 300, Loche r t Op-, ett. , p assi m. 

28) On early German settlers in Missouri, see Bryan & Rose, Pioneer Families of 
Missouri, page 450 and passim. But these compilers are not always accurate, especially as 
to the spelling of German names, 




















































































































18 


souri. But after a few years of pioneer- 
ing he moved to St. Louis to become the 
editor and publisher of a German paper, 
“Die Wage ” Soon after he died. 
Among the members of the Giessen as- 
sociation none has risen to higher es- 
teem in his new home than Friedrich 
Muench. v He had been the pastor of a 
Protestant country parish in Hesse, as 
his father had been before him. He set- 
tled in Warren County, and. was one of 
the few of these educated pioneers who 
made a success of farming. On this 
place he lived until his death, but dur- 
ing all that time he was a fertile con- 
tributor to numbers of periodicals, both 
German and English, as well as the au- 
thor of a number of books. His wri- 
tings are on a very wide range of sub- 
jects, from a little volume on “Religion, 
Christianity, Orthodoxy and Rational- 
ism, M which was printed at Boston in 
1847. to a “School of Grape Vine Cul- 
ture.” In addition, he was an active 
politician and stump speaker, being a 
delegate to the Chicago National Repub- 
lican convention of i860, and a member 
of the state senate from 1861-1865 29 . 

The fate of this best-organized of the 
emigration societies was shared by prac- 
tically all the others, except some which 
were held together by strong religious 
ties. As soon as the members stepped 
ashore, they discovered that they could 
serve their individual interests better by 
each shifting for himself, and this per- 
sonal interest proved stronger than any 
patriotic motive 30 . Among the other 
societies of this kind some of the more 
important are the “Muehlhaeuser Gesell- 
schaft,” with which Roebling, of Brook- 


lyn Bridge fame, came over in 1831 ; 
The “Rheinbayerische Gesellschaft,” 
with Dr. Geiger as their leader, in 
1833. An interesting experiment was 
that of the “Forty” in Texas, a colony of 
enthusiastic youths which reminds one 
of the dreams of the “Pantisocrats,” with 
which Southey, Coleridge and other lit- 
erary Englishmen at one time busied 
themselves. Among these young men 
was Gustave Schleicher, afterwards a 
prominent member of Congress. The 
dramatic history of the “Mainzer Adels- 
verein” and its settlements in Texas is 
important enough to deserve separate 
treatment, and, therefore, shall be only 
mentioned here. Besides, most of its 
work was done before Texas became 
part of the United States 31 . 

While nothing whatever was accom- 
plished in the direction of their patriotic 
dreams by the immigrants of this class, 
their coming had a very considerable ef- 
fect on the American people. For the 
first time in the history of immigration 
since the days of the Puritans and other 
victims of religious intolerance, was 
there among the hosts of newcomers a 
large number of men of superior social 
and educational standing, who came not 
simply to better their economic condi- 
tion or seek their fortunes, but had in 
view greater and, at least in a degree, 
unselfish ends. Although the pian of 
settling in continuous bodies never came 
to anything there were usually more or 
less numerous groups of this class of im- 
migrants who made their homes closely 
together. Almost all of them at first 
tried the experiment of taking up land 
and becoming farmers, under the sway 


29) Koerner, Op. cit., page 301. 

30) On this failure of colonization societies, see Friedrich Muenc h, m n S ohnellpoa P’, • 
December 1847, reprinted in ,, Deutsche Pionier”, IV., page 3G2. 

31) See, inter alia, Kapp, Geschichte der deutschen Einwanderung in West Texas, At- 
lantische Studien, IV.; Meyer’s Monatshefte, IV., page 150. 








































































































19 


of somewhat fanciful ideas of the noble- 
ness of a life as “free men on their own 
freeholds.” Thus sprang up tHe numer- 
ous colonies of educated Germans in 
various parts of the West, which were 
quite a conspicuous feature of the per- 
iod. These became widely known among 
the German population as “Latin Settle- 
ments, M while the men who composed 
them were nicknamed “Latin Farmers.” 

These Latin Settlements nave played 
a part in bringing about a higher stand- 
ard of civilization in the states of the 
Mississippi Valley, which will be appre- 
ciated at its true worth when the history 
of the culture development of that sec- 
tion comes to be written. As farmers, 
most of the “Latins” were not successes. 
They could not be. The physical power 

and endurance needed bv him who 

* 

wants to make a farm out of a wilder- 
ness were not possessed by many of 
them ; more important than tnat, they 
had intellectual and moral wants that 
could not be satisfied by the narrow and 
barren life of the pioneer. So, to most 
of them, their experiment was a losing 
venture as far as their personal fortunes 
were concerned. Most of them sooner 
or later abandoned their farms ’and went 
to the cities to find more suitable occu- 
pations. In the meantime, the weaker 
among them had become broken in mind 
as well as in body by the hardships they 
had endured, but to most the period of 
their farm life was just the training they 
needed to strengthen and harden them, 
physically and morally, and make them 
men in every fiber. The strongest of 
all, like Friedrich Muench, held out dur- 
ing the long years of pioneer struggles, 
to have their reward by finally seeing a 
young and flourishing civilization spring 


up around them, to rise to pecuniary in- 
dependence, and to become honored and 
influential in their communities. But dur- 
ing all this time the Latin Settlements 
were centers of light, from which higher 
ideals of life than were customary among 
the ordinary settlers spread among wide 
portions of the country. Especially in 
educational matters, these men set t.ie 
standard, not only for their German 
countrymen, but for their American 
neighbors. How well they held up the 
torch of a higher intellectual life even 
amidst the materialism and crudeness 
of frontier conditions is aptly illustrated 
by the growth of what is now the Public 
Library of the city of Belleville, in Illi- 
nois. This grew out of a library estab- 
lished bv the Latin farmers of the neigh- 
borhood in 1836. It is characteristic of 
the objects these founders had in view 
that the first book purchased by them 
was not some light literature to enter- 
tain an idle hour, but a set of Sparks' 
Life of George Washington 32 . A 
graphic description of a similar settle- 
ment of educated Germans in Texas, at 
a somewhat later period, is given by 
Frederick Law Olmsted 33 . On the 
causes which prevented most of the 
‘Latins” from being successful in their 
experiment at frontier farming, Fried- 
rich Muench has written clearly and 
sensibly 34 . 

It would be as superfluous as it is im- 
possible to enumerate all the settlements 
of this class which grew up and flour- 
ished for a while in the states of the 
Middle West and the Southwest. But a 
few of the best known may be men- 
tioned. The oldest*of which I have any 
knowledge was that at Germantown, 
Ohio, which was founded before 1830. 


32) Henry Raab, Origin of the Belleville Public Library, in 17th Annual Report of 
Board of Directors, Belleville Public Library, 1900. 

33) Frederick Law Olmsted, A Journey through Texas, page 430. 

34) Deutsche Pionier, IV., page 231. 







































































































20 


It became a great free-soil and abolition 
center, and a famous station on the “un- 
derground railway.” Portions of Mis- 
souri, especially Warren, Montgomery 
and Gasconade counties, had manv of 
them. Illinois had the well known set- 
tlement in St. Clair county. In Ohio, 
besides the Germantown settlement, 
there was one in the neighborhood of 
Cleveland, where pretty nearly all of the 
Germans of the older generation who 
afterwards rose to professional or polit- 
ical prominence in that city spent the 
first few years of their life in this coun- 
try . 35 

The class of immigrants we have here 
described belong to the political exiles in 
the sense that the principal motive of 
their expatriating themselves was dissat- 
isfaction with the political conditions 
prevailing at home, and to a certain ex- 
tent in that they had more or less vague 
political objects in view, when they came 
here. But the revival of political agita- 
tion and consequent persecution in Ger- 
many, after the July revolution in 
France, caused the arrival of a large 
number of political refugees in the re- 
stricted sense, that is men who were 
either in danger of punishment for polit- 
ical offenses, or had been convicted of 
such offenses and pardoned, as was a 
common practice, on condition of leav- 
ing the country. 

The refugees during the period with 
which we are now dealing were not only 
a good deal more numerous than their 
forerunners during the preceding dec- 
ade, but they found on their arrival a 
very different condition of things. In 
the days when Lieber and Follen came 
to the United States, there was in this 
country no strong element of immigrated 
Germ ans. The native - born of Germ a n 
descent, who in parts of Pennsylvania 


and other states still retained much of 
their distinctive nationality, had yet lost 
touch with the life of the old country, 
and the exiles found no readier, if so 
ready, a reception among them than 
among Americans of British extraction. 
But even at that period a new immigra- 
tion had begun, and by the middle of the 
fourth decade there was present a strong 
body of Germans, many of whom had by 
that time been in the country sufficiently 
long to have obtained a measure of 
wealth and influence. Yet these were 
still recent enough arrivals to have vivid 
recollections of the old home, and conse- 
quently to sympathize with the aspira- 
tions of its people. At the same time, 
the more intelligent among them had 
learned in this country to take an inter- 
est in public affairs and to know and be- 
lieve in free institutions. It is but natu- 
ral, therefore, that their sympathies 
should be on the side of the Liberals as 
against the governments of the old coun- 
try. Under these circumstances the ex- 
iles found a warm reception, and in the 
cases of many, who had been prominent 
at home, even an enthusiastic and dem- 
onstrative welcome. 

The fugitives were mostly poor, in 
contrast to the “Latin farmers,” who 
were usually men of some means. 
However much many of them may have 
shared in the fanciful inclinations to- 
wards an idyllic country life, few of 
them could realize these wishes. Of 
necessity they congregated in the cities, 
where they could hope to find some occu- 
pation that would afford them a liveli- 
hood. Soon New York, Philadelphia 
and Baltimore, as well as the centers of 
German life in the West, particularly 
Cincinnati and St. Louis, each had its 
lit - t -le colony of political exited. Tf These 
men were poor in the goods of this 


35) See Koerner, Op. cit. , page 229. 






















































































21 


world, they were brimful of enthusiasm 
and of ideas, more or less crude, and 
more or less capable of maturing into 
something valuable. Naturally, these 
ideas and enthusiasms sought an outlet, 
and for a majority of the exiles the easi- 
est road to this end seemed journalism. 

Consequently a sudden and considera- 
ble increase in the number of German 
papers in the United States dates from 
this period. 

German newspapers in the United 
States were not a new thing. Thev had 
flourished in colonial times, especially in 
Pennsylvania, and not a few of them still 
survived, the most important of which 
was the “Reading Adler.” But many of 
the older papers were written in the 
“Pennsylvania Dutch” jargon, rather 
than in German, and all were entirely 
out of touch with the German life of the 
time — either that of the old country or 
that of the newly immigrated element. 
A change in this regard was brought 
about largely through the Influence of 
the political refugees and those whose 
sentiments agreed with theirs. 

One of the most important of the new 
journals was founded by Johann Georg 
Wesselhoeft in Philadelphia, in 1834, 
and called “Alte und Neue Welt.” This 
man was a cousin of the New England 
physicians of that name, mentioned 
above. He combined with his news- 
paper business a book store, and was one 
of the first to import into this country 
the works of the modern popular writers 
of Germany. Another important one of 
the new papers was “Die Schnellpost” of 
New York, edited by Wm. von Eichthal. 
These two publications were rather more 
like semi-literarv weeklies than newspa- 
pers ^proper. Of the latter kind the 
most important founded during this 
period were the New York “Staatszei- 

36 ) See, besides files of newspapers, 
passim. Deutsche Pionier, passim. 


tung” (founded 1834) ; the Cincinnati 
“Volksblatt” (founded 1836), and the 
St. Louis /‘Anzeiger des Westens” 
(founded 1835). There were, of course, 
a great many other newspapers started, 
many of ephemeral life, others of purely 
local interest. The better class of the 
new papers were almost without excep- 
tion written and edited by political exiles 
or their partisans. It followed necessa- 
rily that the men who contributed to 
these journals became drawn into the 
public affairs of their new homes, and 
gradually many of them became leader* 
of their countrymen in political matters. 

This leadership, however, was not at- 
tained without considerable difficulties 
and some hard struggles. In the first 
place, each of these men had to pass 
through that period of transition which 
every immigrant has to pass through be- 
fore he feels fairly at home in his new 
surroundings. During this period, and 
before they had acquired an adequate 
knowledge of existing conditions, the 
dreams about purely German states, 
which were described in connection with 
the Giessen Emigration Society, were 
apt to prove particularly alluring. 
Accordingly, the columns of the German 
papers, at this time, are filled with dis- 
cussion about these plans. “Alte unci 
Neue Welt,” particularly, might almost 
be called, during a number of years, the 
organ of this movement. Other papers, 
in the hands of more experienced men, 
threw cold water over the heads of the 
enthusiasts, who were apt to revenge 
themselves by calling their well-meaning 
monitors “traitors to the German cause,” 
and charging them with being bought by 
the politicians. 8 ® 

For the Jailer accusation there was 
occasionally no lack of plausible evi- 
dence. About this time the new Ger- 

Loeher, Op. cit., passim; Koerner, Op. cit. , 



























































































22 


man element, growing rapidly, as it did, 
in numbers, began to be of political im- 
portance in those parts of the country 
where it was numerous. It should be 
observed, that up to this time the masses 
of the German population were exceed- 
ingly indifferent towards politics. Not 
being accustomed to any sort of partici- 
pation in public affairs in their old 
homes, being, moreover, poor and en- 
grossed in the struggle for their eco- 
nomic existence, they were content to 
leave politics to the “ Yankees.” Many 
did not even take the trouble to become 
naturalized ; others voted without under- 
standing what they were doing — the 
veriest voting cattle. This condition of 
things was a constant source of indigna- 
tion to the refugees and other educated 
new-comers. They never tired of at- 
tempting. to arouse the masses of their 
countrymen from this indifference, and 
in the course of a few years had consid- 
erable success in this direction. 87 

The indifference of the masses, how- 
ever, was not the only difficulty in the 
path of refugees who aspired to become 
political leaders of their countrymen. 
They had to reckon also with the oppo- 
sition of those among the older Germans 
in the country who had risen to affluence 
and position. This class was compara- 
tively numerous in the cities of the sea- 
board, especially New York, Baltimore 
and New Orleans. Here it was com- 
posed largely of wealthy importing mer- 
chants, together with a sprinkling of pro- 
fessional men. A similar, though smaller, 
class of Germans existed also in such 
places as Cincinnati and St. Louis. Until 
the political immigrants of the “Thir- 


ties’* became conspicuous, this class hid 
held aloof from the mass of the Germans 
in a sort of aristocratic exclusiveness. 88 
But when the new-comers began their 
work of educating the masses and espe- 
cially arousing them to an assertion of 
their political rights, the “swells” 
(Geschwollenen ) , as German- American 
slang dubbed them, on their part also 
began to take an interest in the laborers, 
artisans and small shopkeepers who con- 
stituted the greater portion of the Ger- 
man elements in the cities. For the 
“swells” were Whigs, while the political 
immigrants, in an overwhelming major- 
ity, became Jacksonian Democrats as 
soon as they had somewhat familiarized 
themselves with the political life of the 
country. For a while, there was a sharp 
struggle for the loyalty of the German 
voters. The outcome could hardly be 
other than it was, for reasons which will 
be treated more at length below. The 
Democrats gained a sweeping victory, 
and all but a small percentage of German 
voters remained true to them, from now 
until the advent of the Republican party. 

Among the incidents of this brief 
struggle by the political parties for the 
adherence of the German voters a nota- 
ble one is a series of meetings held dur- 
ing the summer of 1834 in the city of 
New York. A meeting attended largely 
by recently arrived “Politicals” took 
place in Tammany Hall, in which strong 
support was given to the Democracy in 
the state and municipal- campaign then 
pending. Soon after, on August 3, a 
German meeting was held at Masonic 
Hall, at which F. J. Grund, of whom 
more will be said below, was the princi- 


37) Loeher, Op. cit., passim. 

38) Rattermann, speaking more particularly of New Orleans, says: ,,Das geistige 

Deutschthum verkehrte hier fast gar nicht mit den Massen, die zumeist in einer Vorstadt leb- 
ter» Hie S pit ae n -des G e l s t es, Obei l ichtei Rost, Richter Rosenus, der beruhmte Arzt 
Luetxenburg, aowie die hauptsichlichsten Grosskaufleute, verkehrten mit dem franzosisch- 
englischen Element. Erst in den vierziger Jahren wurde diese Kluft iiberbruckt.” Deutsch- 
Amer. Magazin, vol. 1, page 3. 















































































































' 


































23 


pal speaker. Resolutions were passed in 
which the word “Whig” was not men- 
tioned. But the action of the Tammany 
Hall meeting was condemned, “because 
it tended to separate the Germans from 
the rest of the community, because it 
endorsed principles that did not serve the 
common weal, and because it was largely 
composed of men too ‘brief a time in 
this country to understand the vital ques- 
tions of politics.” 

This was clearly a gauntlet thrown in- 
to the arena by the Whig element, and 
the Democrats were not slow to take it 
up. On October 27, another meeting of 
Germans was held at Tammany Hall, at 
which 3,000 people are said to have at- 
tended. Speeches were made by John 
A. Stemmier, F. W. Lassack and other 
men of local note, and an address was 
adopted, in which the Germans were ex- 
horted to unite, to exert the influence to 
which their nationality was entitled, and 
to support as vigorously as possible the 
principles of the Democratic party. At 
the election held a few days lateU the 
Democrats carried the city by barely 
1,800 votes, and as the great majority 
of the Germans had been on their side, 
these fairly claimed the honors of the 
victory. 39 

In these meetings, refugees had been 
conspicuous. They were still more so in 
the organization of the “Germania” so- 
ciety, on January 24, 1835. The objects 
of this association were thus stated in its 
printed constitution-: “To unite more 

closely the Germans living in the United 
States, in order to maintain and promote 
a vigorous German character, good Ger- 
man customs and German culture ; to 
support the principles of a pure Democ- 
racy in the new home ; nourish love and 

39 ) 

40 ) 

IV., page 83. 

41 ) 


attachment for the old country, and to 
work towards the end that as soon as 
possible better conditions be brought 
about in Germany also, similar to those 
enjoyed in the United States ; and to sup- 
port, with counsel and deed, German 
political refugees. 40 The practical work 
of this association was largely confined 
to agitating the concentration of the 
German element and the state project. 
Of course there were no better results 
than were had by other chasers of this 
rainbow. 

In other centers of the German ele- 
ment, as well as in New York, there was 
a brief struggle, before the Democrats 
succeeded in capturing practically the 
whole German vote. In Cincinnati, vig- 
orous efforts were made to establish a 
German Whig paper, to compete with 
the Democratic “Volksblaft.” It is 
said 41 that the early Germans in Ohio 
and Indiana, during the “era of good 
feeling,” had been very largely followers 
of Henry Clay. The “bargain and cor- 
ruption” cry, after the election of Presi- 
dent Adams, turned them towards Jack- 
son, who received their support in 1828. 
But when the Whig party arose, this ele- 
ment gave it very largely its adherence, 
until the power of these “old settlers” 
was superseded by the new activity of 
the German masses under the leadership 
of the refugees. In Cincinnati, the 
stru ggl e took the shape of an agitation 
for the teaching of German in the public 
schools, to which the Whigs were op- 
posed, while the Democrats favored it. 
The course of this struggle is not within 
the limits of the present work, except 
perhaps to the extent of saying that 
among the prominent participants were 
such political refugees as Henry Roed- 

Deutache Pionler, 


Besides newspaper files, see Koerner, Op. cit., page 107. 

The original is in German. See Koerner, Op. cit., page 10i 

Deutsche Pionier, passim. 



















































































24 


ter, who had been one of the organizers 
of the “Hambacher Fest,” and Chas. G. 
Reemelin, who was one of those emi- 
grating under Duden’s influence. 

Similarly, but brief mention can be 
made of the conflicts between the Ger- 
man element and the nativistic agitation 
which became somewhat vigorous about 
the middle of the fourth decade. It is 
difficult to say whether this movement 
was a result of the new political import- 
ance of the Germans ; or whether con- 
versely the efforts of the refugees to 
arouse a greater interest in public affairs 
among their countrymen were facilitated 
by nativist aggressions. Probably both 
was the case. The nativist hostility was 
not, of course, directed against the polit- 
ical exiles in particular, but against all 
manifestations of German national spirit 
which seemed to be adverse to the claims 
of American national sentiment. The 
masses of the German element were most 
directly touched, not by the political re- 
strictions which nativists desired to place 
upon them, but by attacks on their modes 
of living. About this time assaults on 
German picnickers by bands of roughs 
began to be common, and at the same 
time the English-speaking churches com- 
menced to be alarmed at German notions 
of Sunday-keeping. We will be obliged 
to recur to these matters in the next 
chapter, but their detailed treatment be- 
longs to the history of the nativist move- 
ment rather than to that of the political 
exiles. 

When it is said that the masses of the 
German element were first roused to an 
interest in public affairs by the political 
refugees who came .from Germany after 
the abortive revolutionary attempts of 
the early “Thirties,” it must not be un- 
derstood that many of this cl as s b e came 
conspicuous as partisan politicians, even 
locally. The truth was that few of these 
men were fitted to do the work of cau- 


cuses and conventions and of “bringing 
out the vote.” But they supplied the in- 
tellectual weapons by their journalistic 
work, and by the organization of various 
societies, which had no direct connection 
with party politics, but in which the Ger- 
man artisans and shopkeepers for the 
first time had an opportunity to learn 
how to act in concert with others, and 
where their minds were directed to mat- 
ters outside of the narrow routine of 
their daily lives. The actual local party 
work was usually done by men of an en- 
tirely different type, who were sprung 
from the masses themselves, and were in 
far closer touch with them than the edu- 
cated refugees. These “hustlers” and 
“heelers,” of course, expected to be, and 
were, rewarded for their work by ap- 
pointment to petty offices. The only way 
in which the educated refugees could 
hope to find partisan reward, at this 
time, was by having their newspapers 
subsidized. Such subsidies were usually 
a matter of life or death for the strug- 
gling concerns. But a newspaper re- 
ceiving financial support from a political 
party was, of course, bound hand and 
foot to the interests of its supporters. 
Such a paper could hardly afford to ad- 
vocate plans like the German State 
project, which no American politician, 
whether Democrat or Whig, could possi- 
bly countenance. Here is the modicum 
of plausibility in the charges sometimes 
made by the German State dreamers, 
that papers like the New York Staats- 
zeitung or the Anzeiger des Westens, 
which opposed their plans, were bought 
by the politicians. But it must not be 
forgotten that a few years’ residence in 
this country usually sufficed to show an 
intelligent man the futility of these 
project s , Tbi German State, clea was 
essentially a greenhorn’s scheme. 

There were some, however, among the 
educated Germans who even in this early 








































































































25 


period rose to some degree of prom- 
inence in party politics. Such were, for 
instance, Chas. G. Reemelin and Peter 
Kaufmann in Ohio; Dr. Brunk of Buf- 
falo, and especially F. J. Grund, of Penn- 
sylvania. 42 Most of these were very re- 
spectable, patriotic men of moderate 
abilities. Grund was far superior to 
them in point of talent, but unfortun- 
ately an utterly unprincipled soldier of 
fortune, who was ready to change his 
party allegiance at a moment’s notice, 
if he could see a personal advantage in 
doing so. Starting as a Whig, he soon 
became a Jacksonian, and during Van 
Buren’s first presidential campaign issued 
a German biography of the Democratic 
candidate, whose German descent ne 
emphasized. An appointment as consul 
to Antwerp was his reward, but he was 
dissatisfied and in 1840 was a Whig once 
more. A campaign biography of Gen. 
Harrison was his contribution to the 
party cause, in which his idol of four 
years ago was ridiculed as a “Hol- 
lander,” no longer a German. When 
after Harrison’s death President Tyler 
entered the Democratic camp, Grund fol- 
lowed him, and this time actually re- 
mained a Democrat until after the out- 
break of the civil war. Under Buchanan 
he was consul at Havre. In September, 
1863, he unexpectedly appeared in the 
Union League Club, at Philadelphia, and 
delivered an enthusiastic Republican 
speech. His sudden conversion caused 
quite a sensation among his former party 
associates, though they were hardly as 
bitter as he seems to have imagined. A 
few days later there happened to be a 
crowd of people in front of his house, 
making a good deal of noise. Grund. 
whether from excessive vanity or evil 
conscience, imagined that a moh oi Dem- 
ocrats was about to lynch him. In hot 


haste he ran through the back door to 
the police station, to get help. Hardly 
had he made known his errand, when he 
sank to the floor, and died within a few 
minutes of a stroke of apoplexy. 48 

To understand why it was that for 
twenty years and more the great mass of 
Germans, as of other foreigners, were 
stout adherents of the Democracy, . it is 
but necessary to consider the principles 
and tendencies of that party and those 
of its Whig opposition, and especially to 
compare the elements of which each was 
mainly composed. It may be said that 
one of the foundations on which the 
Whig organization rested was a strong, 
sense of American nationality. The 
Whig, whether he reasoned it out or not, 
was a man who believed that the Ameri- 
can people was distinct from all others 
as an organism with an individualitv of 
its own, and he was proud of the fact. 
He disliked, instinctively, anything 
which might tend to efface the self-con- 
tained character of this national individ- 
uality. Therefore he was apt to look, 
with disfavor on the foreign element, 
and was inclined to either throw obsta- 
cles into the way of its growth or else 
force it into a more speedy amalgama- 
tion with the American people, provided, 
the foreigners would simply become- 
Americans of the traditional kind, with- 
out modifying the popular type by con- 
tributing some of their own characteris- 
tics. The nativist movement was noth- 
ing but the radical expression of tenden- 
cies strongly existing within the Whig: 
party. 

In the Democracy, on the other hand, 
the consciousness of national individual- 
ity was far less strong, and the force of 
“Jeffersonian” ideas about the equality 
of all men, wilt their « tr ongly cosmo - . 
politan tinge, much stronger. Where the* 


42) For biographical data regarding these men, see Koerner, Op. cit., passim. 

43) Koerner, Op. cit., page 59; newspapers of the day. 







































































26 


Whig looked askance at the immigrant, 
the Democrat welcomed him and facili- 
tated his progress. The Jeffersonian 
jargon about liberty, equality and the 
rights of the people was as apt to flow 
from the lips of the Whig as from that 
of the Democrat, but the latter’s acts 
seemed more often in accord with the 
glittering phrase. 

Another important characteristic of 
the Whig party was that its economic 
principles were, on the whole, those find- 
ing special favor among the wealthier 
classes. The merchant, the manufac- 
turer, the banker, the land-speculator was 
most likely a Whig ; the Democrats 
claimed to favor, and to a great extent 
really did favor, more particularlv the 
interests of the workingman, the small 
farmer and the settler in the West. 
There was a certain amount of truth at 
the bottom of the exaggerated charges 
by the Jacksonians, that the Whigs were 
an aristocratic party, and that the Demo- 
crats alone were the party of the people 
and the upholders of true American 
principles, as laid down in the Declara- 
tion of Independence. 

The immigrant was generally poor ; 
he would naturally be drawn toward the 
party which claimed to be the special 
champion of the common people against 
the encroachment of the wealthy. If, in 
addition, that party took hi.s side when 
the other party attempted to restrain him 
in following customs he had learned in 
Tiis old home, or refused to give him 
equal political rights with the native citi- 
zen, was it not natural that the Democ- 
racy was the party for him ? 

While such were undoubtedly the mo- 
tives of the masses, the educated German, 
and particularlv the political refugee, 
had additional re as o n* for feel i n g drawn 
towards Jacksonianism. The doctrines 
of Thomas Jefferson were on the whole 
identical with those for which he had 


fought and suffered in Europe. His 
highest social and political ideals, like 
Jefferson’s, were “Liberty and Equal- 
ity.” He was very apt to identify the 
Whigs with the aristocracies of Euro- 
pean countries; for during many years 
after his arrival in this country he had 
the habit of measuring everything with 
European standards, and he could hardly 
conceive of political parties except as the 
respective champions of aristocratic, 
which he called reactionary, and demo- 
cratic, which to him were necessarily 
progressive, principles. Under these 
circumstances the educated Germans 
were, like their more ignorant brethren, 
apt to be Jacksonians, unless like the old 
settlers of 1835, they had become well-to- 
do and Americanized before the German 
immigrant had become an appreciable 
factor in American life. 

This inclination towards the Demo- 
cratic party continued until the Democ- 
racy of the Northern states had changed 
its nature and become merely the hum- 
ble retainer of the Southern plantation 
aristocracy. Even then a very large 
proportion of the masses as well as of 
the leaders continued to act with the old 
party that had stood by the foreigners in 
their early struggles against the nativists 
and their Whig sympathizers. The first 
break in the allegiance of the Germans to 
the party of Jackson is almost synchro- 
nous with the appearance on the scene 
of the third and largest wave of political 
exiles thrown across the Atlantic, after 
the year 1848. But before we enter on 
the treatment of the period dating thence, 
there should be a few words on some 
common characteristics of the exiles of 
this earlier epoch, who were in a number 
of respects quite different from their suc- 
ce ss or s. 

The generation of young Germans 
which first felt the heavy hand of the 
Mettemich system stood under the in- 







































» 























































27 


fluence of three intellectual currents, 
which were in many respects flowing in 
different directions, and thereby added 
not a little to the confusion natural 
enough in the heads of these youthful 
and inexperienced politicians. The first 
of these were the reminiscences of the 
French Revolution, not so much the 
Revolution of Robespierre and Marat, 
as that of 1789, with its optimistic en- 
thusiasm for humanity, in other words, 
its Jeffersonian doctrines. The second 
great factor in their intellectual make-up 
was the philosophy of Kant, modified 
and applied to practical life by Fichte. 
This contributed to their enthusiasm for 
liberty an austere moral rigorism. The 
third great stream of ideas was that 
many-featured, multi-colored body of 
beliefs, fancies and nations, called 
Romanticism. From those interesting, 
though turbid, waters Liberals and 
Governmental, the Enlightened and the 
Obscurantists drank alike, each selecting 
for himself what seemed good to him 
out of the variety of its ingredients. 
From this source the “Burschenschaft- 
ler” drew especially their rervent love of 
nationality, their admiration for the past 
glories of the German race. Such influ- 
ences combined to make these youths 
austerely moral, fervently patriotic, and 
imbued them with an idealism that cared 
little for actual conditions, but was quite 
willing to reconstruct the world anew 
according to a preconceived notion. 
They were just the material out of w r hich 
political and religious radicals could be 
made. But they were not yet radicals. 
In politics, so far as they had definite 
notions, a constitutional emperor, decked 
out with much romantic tinsel, seemed 
to most of them the ideal form of gov- 
ernment fnr Germanv. In religion, they 
considered themselves rather orthodox, 
especially as compared to the shallow 
rationalism of the preceding generation. 


To be sure, their type of orthodoxy was 
quite different from the narrow and, in 
plain terms, ignorant orthodoxy then 
widely prevailing in the United States. 
But they were certainly very far from 
being ‘Infidels’' or “atheists," like their 
successors of 1848. Many of them were 
preparing for the ministry, or had 
already entered on its functions. Among 
the exiles to the United States, not a 
few, like Follen, became ministers of the 
gospel. 

Such were the men of 1820. During 
the following decade, the philosophy of 
Hegel held undisputed sway over the 
minds of all educated Germans. It was 
a doctrine which, like Romanticism, 
could supply nourishment to the most 
opposite tendencies. By the time the 
second wave of refugees came to Amer- 
ica, the school of Hegel had produced 
an offshoot calling itself the Young 
Hegelians, which drew from the princi- 
ples of the master inferences of the most 
radical nature, in politics as well as in 
religion, while Hegel himself, especially 
in bis later days, was decidedly conserv- 
ative. However, the wide prevalence of 
this school of thought came somewhat 
later. The exiles of the “thirties" were 
still believers in Christianity; they sup- 
ported churches, although of a decidedly 
liberal type. Their main difference from 
the older refugees was the absence of 
fervent nationalism, which was replaced 
by a cosmopolitan sentiment similar to 
that so common before the Napoleonic 
invasion. At the Wartburg-Fest, in 
1817, hatred of the French had been as 
pronounced as love of the Fatherland. 
At the Hambacher Fest, in 1832, 
speeches by Frenchmen and Poles were 
as enthusiastically applauded as those by 
Germa ns. Tins t h eor e ti cal -cosmopoli- 
tanism, however, did not prevent the 
new-comers from attempting, in the 
Lnited States, the maintenance of a sep- 




















































































28 


arate national existence for their coun- 
trymen, while their predecessors, with all 
their love for a romantic Teutonism, had 
disappeared with comparative ease in 
the general life of the American people. 
The same contradiction between theoret- 
ical ideas and practical activity will be 
found in the men of 1848, who were even 
more international and cosmopolitan in 
their opinions. 

CHAPTER IV. 


The Forty-Eighters. 

Large as was the number of those who 
had to go into exile after the revolutionary 
movements following the overthrow of 
the Bourbons in France, it was insignifi- 
cant compared to the hosts of refugees 
who flocked to the asylums given them in 
Switzerland, England and the United 
States during the period of reaction after 
the violent commotions of 1848. At first 
a comparatively small number of them 
crossed the Atlantic; for London, where 
most of them were congiegated after all 
kinds of vicissitudes, was nearer to their 
homes, and they all hoped for a speedy 
return, when new revolutions were to 
overthrow finally the “despotic” rule of 
kings and emperors. Gradually, as these 
hopes vanished, more and more of them 
discovered that it would be easier for them 
to make a living in the United States than 
in London, and by the year 1853 a very 
large number had followed in the steps of 
those who from the start had pitched their 
tents in America. 

In order to comprehend what part these 
“Forty-Eighters” (Achtundvierziger), as 
they soon came to be called, played in 
the history of the United States, it will be 
necessary to consider what they had stood 
for in Germany and what manner of men 
they were We had occasio n to r e mar k 
in the preceding chapter, how the opposi- 
tion to the Mettemich system of repress- 
ing all popular activity in politics became 


gradually more radical. By the year 1848, 
a very large portion of those classes which 
took an interest in public matters at all 
had become imbued with ultra-democra- 
tic notions. They believed in the repub- 
lican form of government as the only one 
fit for civilized society. All monarchies, 
no matter how strictly limited, were mere- 
ly forms of oppression. All kings and 
princes were enemies of mankind. An 
enthusiastic belief in “Liberty” was, with 
most of them, coupled with fanatical intol- 
erance of all who disagreed with them. 
The strength of their convictions was us- 
ually proportionate to their inexperience 
of the actual business of government. Of 
this inexperience there was a most re- 
markable amount in the ranks of these re- 
formers. Naturally the men who were 
practically acquainted with such matters 
were not to be found among them, for 
radical or even pronounced liberal opin- 
ions were not favorable to a man’s rising 
very high in an official career under the 
Metternich system. The great majority 
of the radical leaders were literary men, 
journalists, advocates, physicians. Their 
following came almost exclusively from 
the small tradesmen and workingmen of 
the cities. The wealthier commercial 
classes, as well as large numbers of the 
professional and official class, were most- 
ly adherents of a moderate Liberalism 
and believed in a constitutional monarchy. 
Instead of a German Republic, the aim 
of the Radicals, the Liberals desired a 
Germany united under the sway of an em- 
peror, with an imperial parliament to rep- 
resent the people. The country popula- 
tion, both squire and peasant, were as a 
class the staunchest of conservatives. 

Such being the ranks of society from 
which the Radicals mostly came, it must 
be mentioned in addition that they were 
mostly v cruug 'men ; arrd a third circum- 
stance important to remember is that Ra- 
dicalism had its chief strength in the 
Southern portions of Germany, and along 





































































































29 


the Rhine. Elsewhere, it was on the 
whole confined to the large cities, such as 
Berlin, Dresden and Breslau. In the 
Parliament, which met at Frankfurt early 
in the summer of 1848, to deliberate on a 
constitution for a united Germany, these 
Radicals formed the “Democratic Left.” 
But a large portion of them expected no 
good results from the work of an assem- 
bly in which the moderate Liberals had a 
majority. Even before the Parliament 
met, the Democrats of the Palatinate and 
Baden, under the leadership of Friedrich 
Hecker, had attempted to establish the 
Republic by force of arms. 44 This at- 
tempt was repeated by other leaders 
(Struve, Brentano, Sigel, etcA in the au- 
tumn of the same year, and in 1849. 
When the governments, recovering from 
the paralysis of the spring and summer of 
1848, finally restored their ascendency, it 
was principally the Democrats who felt 
their heavy hand. Nearly all of this party 
had been guilty of insurrection. It was 
no longer necessary to resort to the tricks 
of Metternich’s special commission, which 
in the days of the Burschenschaft had 
twisted the most innocent expressions into 
evidence of treasonable plots. Now the 
proofs of overt acts of treason and sedi- 
tion were as open as daylight, and the 
regular courts vied with courts-martial in 
executing and imprisoning those of the 
insurgents and their too open sympathiz- 
ers who fell into their hands. In addition 
to the Baden insurrections, which assumed 
dimensions of warfare, there had been 
numerous riots and barricade fights in al- 
most every city of any importance, and 
everybody who had been in any way con- 
cerned in these felt his liberty and life in 
danger. Consequently, thousands of ref- 
ugees soon crowded into Switzerland, 


France, England and the United States, 
and soon “colonies'’ of refugees were 
found in all the principal cities of these 
countries. To the German exiles were 
added numbers of Italians, Poles, Hun- 
garians; and after France had fallen at 
the feet of Louis Napoleon, French refu- 
gees were added to the list.. For a num- 
ber of years these exiles were firmly con- 
vinced that within a short time renewed 
revolutions would call them oack in tri- 
umph. For this purpose they labored in- 
cessantly though with woefully inadequate 
means. Nearly all of the’ exiles were 
poor, sometimes penniless, when they ar- 
rived in the place that offered them safe- 
ty. Those who had left property behind, 
often found that their fortunes were se- 
questrated or confiscated, while proceed- 
ings in contumaciam were instituted 
against the owners. Very few among 
the refugees knew a handicraft, although 
an occasional printer or engraver was 
found among their number. The univer- 
sity training nearly all had received fitted 
them for few things by which a livelihood 
could be gained in a strange land. Con- 
sequently there was much acute distress 
in all the refugee colonies. Many of the 
exiles had families dependent upon them, 
and the suffering of devoted wives, who 
in many cases shared to the full the en- 
thusiasm of their husbands and their loy- 
alty to principle, must not be forgotten 
when the story of these struggles for the 
political freedom of the European conti- 
nent is written. There was much bitter 
misery patiently endured, much heroic 
constancy exhibited with modest dignity. 
A surprisingly large number of these men 
in later years reached honor and influence 
either in their native land or in the new 
country, which from a place of exile had 


The still earlier mob violence at Berlin, V ienna and elaewhere f by which the 
revolutionists gained their temporary ascendency (March 1848) can hardly be said to have 
been the work of the Democrats. These movements were really as spontaneous uprisings 
of the people as such movements ever are, and those who principally bene fitted from them were 
the Liberals. 












































































































30 


at last become a second home to them. 
Many of them confessed that the trials of 
their early years in exile contributed not 
the least part to the strengthening and 
moulding of their minds and characters. 

In the published letters and memoirs of 
the refugees comparatively little of this 
nobler side of their lives appears. In the 
personal records of the Germans, especial- 
ly, there is surprisingly little self-glorifi- 
cation, while their Italian fellow-sufferers, 
true to the difference in national charac- 
ters, seem to be far less averse to the plac- 
ing of one’s own merits in a proper light. 
The dignity of political exile must often 
be appreciated by the art of reading be- 
tween the lines, while the expressed words 
but too frequently show a picture of petty 
bickerings, trifling activities and now and 
then the stain of betrayal and crime. Be- 
ing cut off from all real participation in 
politics, the refugees easily fell into mere 
phrasemongering, and he who could speak 
the loudest and most violently, in the safe- 

tv of a London club or a New York beer 
* 

garden, was apt to be accounted the ablest 
and best among them. Still worse was a 
loss of moral as well as mental perspec- 
tive. Conditions in their native country 
were seen in unduly black colors, while 
the failure of open revolutions led at least 
some to attempt conspiracies and assas- 
sinations. The genius of the German peo- 
ple is not favorable to such enterprises, 
and although some of the refugees in Lon- 
don were in pretty close touch with Maz- 
zini, the Italian arch-conspirator, nothing 


serious ever resulted from such plans. 
Theoretically, however, tyrannicide was 
approved by not a few of the more violent 
minds. 

In fact, some of the refugees who soon 
began writing for papers in the United 
States, made the killing of tyrants in the- 
ory so prominent a feature of their effus- 
ions, that German-American slang invent- 
ed a special term to designate this type of 

ranter. The man who ate a tvrant for 

* 

breakfast every morning was called a 
“ Ferschtekiller"* a ludicrous word 
which well fits the ludicrous personage. 4 ® 
But slightly more serious were the resolu- 
tions and manifestos which emanated 
from these circles, and by the publication 
of which it was sought to excite the people 
at home to new revolutionary efforts. 
Karl Marx, himself one of these exiles, in 
a letter to the New York Tribune, dated 
October 25th, 1851, speaks of many of his 
fellow exiles as “transported beyond the 
seas to England or America, there to form 
new governments in partibus inUdelium, 
European committees, central committees, 
national committees, and to announce 
their advent with proclamations quite as 
solemn as those of any less imaginary po- 
tentates.” This sort of rather useless ac- 
tivity employed the energies of many of 
them for a long time. Wm. Weitling, 
meeting Julius Froebel in New York, 
some time after both had left Germany, 
was told by the latter that he had gone into 
business as a soap manufacturer. “I have 
no time for such material occupations,” 


Ferschtekiller ,” i. e. prince killer. “ Ferscht ” is a dialectical mis-pronunciation 
of “ Fuersty ** sometimes heard on the lips of uneducated South-Germans. 

A real prince, even if known as Liberal, naturally would not look on such things 
as quite so innocent. Duke Ernst II. of Coburg-Gotha, a well-known Liberal in his views, 
evidently had some apprehensions concerning the “ Ferschtekiller .” 

“Es existirten in London zwei deutsche, sozial-republikanische Gesellschaffen. Ein 
eigener Zweig der Mitglieder wurde mit dem Namen Blindlinge bezeichnet, deren es im Mai 
1850 achtzehn bis zwanzig gab, wovon sieben in Deutschland und vier speciell_in Berlin sich 

befanden Die Th&tigkeit der Clubs wareben damals eine ausserordentlich gesteigerte 

Ich hatte damals durch meine Verbindungen in England Kenntniss von der ausgebrei- 

teten Organisation der geheimen Clubs erhalten, welche in ihren Versammlungen den Fiirsten- 
mord ganz offen betrieben.” Herzog Ernst II., Aus Meinetn Lcbcn, I., page 578. 
















































































- 





























































31 


was Weitling’s proud reply ; “I must labor 
for principle.” 47 There was among them 
a certain proportion of men who -might 
fairly be classed as “cranks,” as is always 
the case with great reform movements. 
About that time, the United States as well 
as Europe furnished no small contingent 
of reformers on the verge of insanity. 
This class is amusingly described by Low- 
ell in his essay on Thoreau. Of the abler 
and more conspicuous of the German ref- 
ugees in the United States, several died 
in asylums for the insane. This was the 
fate of Dr. Kriege, a writer and speaker 
of some ability, but very extreme views. 
He had been in the United States several 
years, but returned to Germany when the 
revolution broke out, and was conspicu- 
ous in the Democratic congresses held at 
Frankfurt and Berlin during the year 
1848. Soon he returned to the United 
States, was for awhile editor of the “Illi- 
nois Staats-Zeitung,” but died at New 
York December 31, 1851, little more than 
31 years.old. 48 Another man whose mind 
could not stand the strain was Christian 
Essellen. He published a monthly ma- 
gazine, the “Atlantis ,” 40 and from reading 
his own sane, though radical, contribu- 
tions in the same one would hardly expect 
him to be “cranky” enough for an incipient 
told by Froebel, who says that he was up- 
braided as a traitor to the cause of liberty 
by Mr. Essellen, for wearing kid gloves 
on the streets of Frankfort. 50 The “At- 
lantis” was not a financial success, and 
the struggle with poverty may have con- 
tributed to the destruction of its editor’s 
mental health. 

Mr. Essellen’s extravagant objection 
to kid gloves was probably shared by not 
a few of his fellow-radicals. For a con- 
tempt of social amenities was a wide- 
spread fad among them. This had been 

47 ) Froebel, Lebenslauf, I., page 280. 

Koerner, Op. cit., page 158. 

* 9 ) See chapter II. 

5°) Froebel, Lebenslauf I., page 281. 


so as far back as the early days of the 
Burschenschaft. Among the men of the 
older generation, it was especially Jahn, 
the father of the “Turner” societies, who 
had cultivated rudeness of manner and 
speech, and disregard of the proprieties of 
polite intercourse. The intellectual small 
fry quickly adopted the fad as an easy 
way of demonstrating that they were true 
Democrats and haters of tyranny. But 
even among the abler men a good deal of 
this affectation was found, and many re- 
tained it long after the popular. approval 
of it had ceased. The chief blemish on 
the writings of many able “Fortv-Eiglu- 
ers” in the United States, as for instance 
Herman Raster, the brilliant editor of the 
“Illinois Staatszeitung” was a delight in 
the use of strong words, and even express- 
ions which the usage of polite society ta- 
boos. In the personal intercourse of such 
men the same mannerism was apt to crop 
out, so that strangers were often repelled. 
Perhaps the fact that so many of the 
“Forty-eighters” were South Germans 
may have had something to do with the 
popularity of the fad among them, for 
South Germans are often charged by their 
more conventional brethren of the North 
with “Grobheit.” In German slang this 
foolish affectation became known by the 
untranslatable term “ Kraftmeierci.” 

Hardly a trace remains of it among Ger- 
man -Americans. 

Still more disagreeable than these ex- 
travagances and eccentricities are the pet- 
ty personal disputes which were rife in the 
refugee colonies everywhere, and especi- 
ally the tendency to suspect others of be- 
ing spies in the pay of the home govern- 
ment. There is no doubt that such spies 
existed. Especially the colonies of the 
exiles in Switzerland, Paris and Brussels 


















































































92 


were under pretty close surveillance; to 
some extent this was true of England. 
Whether an attempt was ever made to in- 
troduce a similar system into the United 
States, cannot be asserted or denied. 
There would seem to be great difficulty in 
the absence of cooperation on the part of 
the local police, such as was readily af- 
forded by the French, Belgian and Swiss 
governments. However that may be, 
many of the exiles in this country were 
but too ready on the slightest evidence to 
charge one of their colleagues with being 
a spy. This charge was made, for in- 
stance, at one time against Carl Schurz ; 
needless to say, it was, in this case at least, 
absolutely unfounded. 61 

These miserable pettinesses and weak- 
nesses were no more than the share of hu- 
man limitations which belonged to the po- 
litical refugees as they would to any other 
group of men in any surroundings what- 
ever. They are more prominent than they 
deserve in the published recollections of 
those who lived through that time. This 
may be explained, to some extent, by the 
fact that the authors of these reminiscen- 
ces had, in their old age, come to look up- 
on the foibles and follies of their youth- 
ful days in a somewhat humorous light, 
an attitude which led them to dwell a little 
unduly on eccentricities and extravagan- 
ces. This was surely the case with such 
men as Kapp, Froebel and Bamberger, 
whose early radicalism had long since ma- 
tured into a sane love for tranquil prog- 
ress. That these disagreeable features 
were far from being essential to the char- 
acter of the refugee class is best shown by 
the fact that in the United States, especial- 
ly, the vast majority needed but a short 
time to become convinced that their duty 


and their interest demanded their enter- 
ing into the life of the country that had 
hospitably received them, as an integral 
portion of its people. Within a few years 
after their arrival nearly all of them had 
found some work to do, some occupation, 
business or profession which gave them 
a standing in the community and saved 
them from the make-belief activities of 
the early days in the refugee colonies. 

At first, to be sure, those make-belief 
activities, those proclamations and speech- 
es and agitation for the renewal of revo- 
lutions in Europe, were taken seriously 
indeed. When Julius Froebel, in 1849, 
in a lecture delivered at New York, ad- 
vised his fellow refugees to cease their at-' 
tempt at revolutionizing Germany and in- 
stead take part in American affairs, he 
was loudly denounced as an apostate and 
traitor by the radical element. 62 Very few 
of the exiles originally came with the in- 
tention of making this country their 
home; they were merely looking for a 
harbor of safety, where they could remain 
until, as the phrase went among them, “es 
wieder losgeht,” it breaks out again. But 
as months and years elapsed, and not- 
withstanding their writings and speeches 
and collections of penny contributions to 
provide the means of war, the mails from 
across the ocean brought no news of fresh 
insurrections, first necessity, then habit 
and at last reason brought them to devote 
their energies to more lucrative and use- 
ful objects. About the middle of the 
sixth decade practically all had taken 
Froebel’s advice. 

The acclimatization of the refugees in 
the United States was on the one hand 
made easy, and on the other hand consid- 
erably retarded by the reception they 


* M ) Interesting details on this “ Spionen-Riecherei ” may be found in Bamberger’s 
4 i Erinntrungen.” On tHe Schurz incident, see local Wisconsin press, especially Beaver Dam 
Democrat and the German papers during 1859 to 1860. Also Letter of Schurz to Potter dated 
March 14, 1859, in Milwaukee Sentinel, April 1, 1900. 

58) Froebel, Lebenslauf \ I., page 283. 























































































33 


found on the part of the people of this 
country. That the resident Germans, 
among whom the refugees of an older 
generation had attained so much influ- 
ence, should feel a wide and deep sympa- 
thy for the newcomers was natural, and 
perhaps it was no less natural that the 
native element should to a considerable 
extent share that sympathy. The strug- 
gles of Europe could not but remind 
Americans of their own revolutionary 
glories. The masses were unable to per- 
ceive the differences between our own war 
for independence and the preservation of 
ancient freedom, and the continental at- 
tempts to gain a liberty that had never 
been possessed by those nations. More- 
over, the “J e ff ers °m an ideas” which were 
identical with the principles of the revolu- 
tionists, were just then in full dominion 
over the American popular mind, after 
having captured the national government 
by the advent of Jackson. The result of 
this combination was that a wave of en- 
thusiasm for the liberty of Europe swept 
through the United States as soon as the 
first new? of the revolutionary outbreaks 
reached this country. 

The original successes of the Revolu- 
tion in France, Germany, Italy and other 
countries were hailed in the United States 
by a series of mass meetings in which na- 


tive- American orators vied with Germans, 
Frenchmen and Irishmen to praise the 
deeds of the barricade heroes and prophe- 
sy the dawn of a glorious liberty for all 
the world. Even the Catholics, carried 
away, no doubt, by Irish sympathies, 
joined the chorus at first, although soon 
after they were bitterly opposed to the 
revolutionary cause. The sympathy for 
the revolutionaries was for awhile nearly 
unanimous; about the only opposition 
came from the ranks of the German Luth- 
erans, who were derived largely from the 
conservative country population of the 
Fatherland . 63 In addition to mass meet- 
ings, attempts were made to provide more 
substantial assistance for the revolution- 
aries. Subscriptions to raise money for 
the insurgents were started and some 
money actually collected. Several refu- 
gees, who had lived in the United States 
for some time, hurried back to join their 
brethren, whose complete triumph they 
fondly anticipated. Among the more 
prominent of these was Herman Kriege, 
mentioned above, and Karl Heinzen . 64 
Within a year both were back in America, 
disillusionized though not discouraged. 
Others, who were unable themselves to 
hurry to the seat of the struggle, followed 
the progress of the movement with the 
most eager interest . 65 


*8) See daily papers of the time; also, Koss, Milwaukee, page 263. 

Karl Peter Heinzen had been conspicuous for a number of years In Germany as a 
writer and pamphleteer of the most radical and decidedly scurrilous type. To escape prose- 
cution he fled to Switzerland. In 1847 a subscription among the Germans in the United 
States was taken, and with the proceeds he and his family were enabled to come to New 
York. See Schem’s Deutsch-Amer. Conversations Lexikon . Koss, Op. cit., passim . 

55) A touching example of the influence the news of the outbreak had on an old Lib- 
eral, who was very far from radical in his opinions, and had been in America a long time, is 
found in a letter from Francis Lieber, then professor at the university of South Carolina, to 
Dr. S. G. Howe. It also illustrates the popular feeling among Americans. Following is a 
portion of the lette-: Columbia, S. C., April 8, 1848. 

An anecdote for you. The other day, when the German news had arrived? [ wa s 

obliged to lecture. I began but I could not. I said “My young friends, I am unfit for 

you this afternoon. News has arrived that Germany too is rising, and my heart is full to 

overflowing. I ” but I felt choked. I pointed to the door. The students left it— gave a 

hearty cheer for “Old Germany.’’ Life and letters of Francis Lieber, page 213. 






























































































































































34 


Mass meetings continued to be held in 
various cities during the summer, when- 
ever the events in Europe afforded an oc- 
casion for further celebration. But after 
a while the prospects of the revolution, 
even in its more moderate phases, began 
to darken. In October, Friedrich Hecker, 
as a forerunner of the swarm of exiles 
soon to follow, arrived at New York. 
Hecker had been among the foremost 
leaders of the Democratic party of Ger- 
many, and was more than any other man 
adapted to become a popular idol. 
Young, 58 handsome, with a fiery, though 
somewhat highly-wrought eloquence, he 
captivated the hearts of all who came near 
him. 37 In April, 1848, he attempted to 
organize an insurrectionary government, 
and at Offenbach in Baden proclaimed 
the German Republic. His little force of 
insurgents was easily dispersed, and 
Hecker fled to Switzerland, whence a few 
months later he embarked for the United 
States. His object seems to have been to 
obtain financial and moral assistance from 
the Germans in this country. The plan 
of inveigling the United States govern- 
ment into taking a hand in the struggle, 
which Kossuth and others devised a few 
years later, seems never to have been con- 
ceived by him. Upon his landing in New 
York, he was received with torchlight 
processions, mass meetings and speech 
making, 58 the city authorities taking a 


prominent part in these proceedings. 
Similarly enthusiastic welcome awaited 
him at Philadelphia, Cincinnati, St. Louis 
and other places he vfsited. In the fol- 
lowing spring, when there was renewed 
fighting in Germany, after the dissolution 
of the Parliament, Hecker hurried back, 
accompanied by a number of men anxious 
to take part in the insurrection, and tak- 
ing with him some money subscribed in 
this country. But before he arrived at 
the seat of war, the Republicans under 
Sigel had been completely beaten, and the 
provisional government, under Brentano, 
was dissolved. There was nothing left 
for him to do, but return to the United 
States. 59 

Receptions of the kind given to Fried- 
rich Hecker were not a new thing, al- 
though the welcome to political refugees 
from Europe had never assumed quite 
the same dimensions as in his case. One 
of the instances where much had been 
made of the arrival of a prominent exile 
was the reception of Dr. Friedrich Sei- 
densticker in the spring of 1846, at New 
York and Philadelphia. 60 This seems to 
have been the first time that the municipal 
authorities took official part in such cere- 
monies, as became common enough later 
on. During the years following the sup- 
pression of the revolutionary movements, 
some of the Republican leaders came to 
the United States under slightly different 


56) He was bom at Echtersheim, Baden, as the son of a high official, and was a law- 
yer by profession. 

57) Bamberger speaks of him as follows: “Friederich Hecker, ein blau-aeugiger 

Jiinglingskopf mit schonem Haar und Bart, feurig und frohlich in die Welt hineinschauend 
und provocirend.” Erinnerungen, page 52. Malvida v. Meysenbug describes him in these 
words: “Hecker war sehr schon, ein Christuskopf mit langem blondem Haar und mit schwar- 
merisch begeistertem Ausdruck.” Memoiren einer Idealistin , I., page 230. 

58) See newspapers of the time, Koerner, Op. cit., page 80; Deutscher Pionier , 
II., page 85. 

59) Hecker settled on a farm near Belleville, 111., where he lived until his death in 
1880. In 1856, he was a candidate for presidential elector on the Fremont ticket. During 
the civil war, he commanded first the 24th, afterwards the 82d Illinois Infantry, both regi- 
ments composed entirely of his German countrymen. At the battle of Chancellorsville he was 
severely wounded. 

6°) See newspapers, especially New York “ Schnellpost . ” Koerner, Op. cit., page 70. 





























































































































35 


circumstances. They had the more or 
less openly avowed intention of prevail- 
ing on this country to abandon its settled 
policy of holding aloof from European 
quarrels and instead of it interfering on 
behalf of European revolutionists. The 
form in which this proposition became 
crystalized was expressed in the phrase 
“intervention for non-intervention.” Thfo 
term referred primarily to the case of 
Hungary, where the power of the House 
of Austria had been restored by the Czar 
of Russia. Its meaning was that . when- 
ever a popular rising took place for the 
purpose of establishing a republic, it was 
to be the business of the United States, 
as a sort of protector of all republics, 
whether actual or prospective, to keep 
monarchical governments from interfer- 
ing in favor of the threatened dynasty. 
The most conspicuous visitor of this kind 
was Louis Kossuth, the revolutionary 
governor of Hungary. Not being a Ger- 
man, he does not specially concern us 
here ; but there were not a few Germans 
who entertained hopes that at the proper 
time the revolutionary cause might be- 
come triumphant in Germany as well as 
in Hungary through the assistance of the 
United States. 61 


About the same time that Kossuth 
traveled about this country to arouse sym- 
pathy for down-trodden Hungary, Gott- 
fried Kinkel, poet and agitator, came to 
call on his countrymen in America In or- 
der to float a so-called “national loan” of 
two millions of dollars for the revolution- 
izing of Germany. During the winter of 
1851-1852 he visited a large number of 
ckies and was everywhere received with 
an enthusiasm second only to that which 
greeted Kossuth himself. He was the 
representative of a committee of refugees 
at London, and wherever he went local 
committees were organized to receive sub- 
scriptions. Fairs and bazars were opened 
by his feminine admirers, and a consider- 
able sum was actually obtained for his 
purposes, although it fell far short of two 
millions. 62 The speeches and resolutions 
held at Kinkel meetings, like those at the 
Kossuth receptions, were full of demands 
upon the government to break with its 
traditional neutrality and adopt the poli- 
cy of “intervention for non-intervention.” 
These demands came by no means from 
foreigners only, but many native-boni 
politicians joined in the chorus. 63 How- 
ever, even the refugees themselves were 
not unanimously in favor of the “national 


01) In the speeches and the resolutions of mass meetings, city councils and even legis- 
latures, with which Kossuth and other visitors of revolutionary fame were greeted, much may 
be found that would naturally encourage such hopes. Undoubtedly, these expressions were 
to some extent pure buncombe, intended to have its effect on foreign-born voters. But the cur- 
rent of real popular sympathy with the revolutionists was very strong, and for a while there 
may have been some actual danger that our diplomacy might be swept from its ancient 
moorings. The matter deserves more detailed study. 

A curious book which gives an idea of what fantastic projects could be found in the 
minds of some of the refugees, was published in 1851 by Theodore Poesche, under the title of 
“Das Neue Rom.” This was translated into English by Charles Goepp, later a well 
known New York lawyer. Mr. Goepp, about the same time, published a pamphlet of his 
own, called “ E pluribus unum In these writings the idea was advocated of the United 
States making itself the nucleus of a federation of republics to embrace the whole world. 
(Theodore Poesche and Charles Goepp, The New Rome, or the United States of the World. 
New York, G. P. Putnam & Co.) 

02) About $10,000. See v. Asten-Kinkel, Johanna Kinkel in England , Deutsche Revue , 
vol. 26, page 71. 

03) See besides daily papers of the time Koss, Milwaukee, page 347; Moriti Busch, 
Wanderungen, passim . 





























































36 


loan.” Such influential men among 
them as Boernstein, of St. Louis, and es- 
pecially the Hungarian Goegg, opposed 
the whole scheme of establishing the lib- 
erty*of Germany or any other European 
country by force from the outside, and 
maintained that the people of those coun- 
tries should first be educated up to the 
point where they desired a new revolu- 
tion ; then they would establish republi- 
can institutions of their own motion. 
Those who thought like this organized 
“agitation societies” in opposition to the 
Kinkel committees. Soon the enthusiasm 
created by the eloquence and captivating 
personality of the poet agitator died away, 
and by the middle of the summer 1852 
little more was heard either of the national 
loan or the agitation societies. 

By the middle of the year 1852 the situ- 
ation of the refugee element had changed 
in some respects from what it was in the 
fall of 1849. The members of the exile 
colonies in New York and other seaboard 
cities had to a great extent given up hopes 
of a speedy return to the fatherland, and 
while many remained in the city that at 
first gave them a resting place, others 
scattered over the country in quest of a 
permanent home and occupation. Soon 
there were few towns in those sections 
which received a considerable foreign im- 
migration, where some “Forty-eighters” 
could not be found. Some who had 
sufficient means, like Friedrich Hecker, 
joined the ranks of the Latin farm- 
ers ; others who had some profes- 
sion of which they could avail them- 
selves in a foreign country, estab- 
lished themselves as physicians, etc. 
Of the large numbers who had been bred 
to the law in Germany, comparatively few 
possessed the requisite adaptibility to gain 
admission to the American bar ; those who 


did were among the ablest and often 
achieved high success, professionally and 
otherwise. Lawyer immigrants who 
lacked this adaptability were apt to swell 
the ranks of those who drifted into jour- 
nalism. During the years following the 
revolution of 1848 German periodicals of 
all kinds multiplied with astonishing rap- 
idity, and the “Forty-eighter” element 
held the editorial chairs in the great ma- 
jority of such enterprises. 04 

The improvement in the economic sit- 
uation of the refugee element which this 
scattering implied was helped along by 
the universal sympathy which their cause 
and their fate excited for awhile. Peo- 
ple, both of German and native stock, 
were anxious to help these men, and the 
fact that one was a political fugitive from 
Europe was during a number of years the 
best recommendation possible. 65 It will 
riow be plain, how, as was stated above, 
the acclimatization of the new-comers 
was both retarded and accelerated by the 
reception they found. So far as they 
were helped to establish themselves in a 
permanent occupation, they were led 
gradually to find their interests here 
rather than in their old home. But to the 
extent to which Arflerican enthusiasm 
abetted the plans and purposes of such 
men as Kossuth and Kinkel, to that ex- 
tent the wholesome process of American- 
ization was counter-acted. By the year 
1855 the former tendency had gained the 
upper hand, and it was settled that the ref- 
ugees as a class would become one of the 
elements which make up the American 
people. Thereafter to speak longer of 
“exile colonies” would be meaningless. 

It was natural that men who had allow- 
ed their political convictions to sway the 
whole course of their lives in Germany 
would not remain indifferent to politics 


w ) Busch in 1851 estimated the number of German periodicals in the United States at 
150; a few years later, the number must have been much higher. Wanderungen , II., page 07. 
65 ) Compare, as an illustration, the incident told by Froebel, Lebenslauf, I., page 278. 


































































































37 


in this country. But the first contact with 
American political life was in practically 
every individual case the cause of a tre- 
mendous disillusionment. The politics of 
these men in Europe had been theoretical 
and idealistic rather than practical and 
realistic; it had been a philosophy, and 
not a business. Now they discovered, 
that while ideas may be one of the hidden 
factors determining political currents, the 
politician in his daily work has to deal 
with the passions, prejudices and interests 
of men infinitely more than with ideas. 
This discovery was a grievous shock to 
them. With an error of logic common 
enough they ascribed this fact, not to the 
human nature to be found everywhere, 
but to the particular depravity of the 
American people. They did not realize 
that they had not made the same discov- 
ery at home simply because there they had 
never had an opportunity to engage in re- 
al politics, but had merely philosophized 
about it, until the year of the revolution. 
When that outbreak came, they began ac- 
tual work under such extraordinary cir- 
cumstances, and amidst such a burst of 
excited enthusiasm, that again the every- 
day aspect of politics remained hidden 
from their eyes. 

The disgust which the discovery of the 
reality caused in these idealists found ex- 
pression in a flood of books, pamphlets 
and articles published on both sides of the 
Atlantic. This species of literature has 
been referred to in the second chapter. 
Another circumstance which contributed 
to the pessimistic view of American po- 
litical life was the fact that the American 
idea of a democratic republic was very 
different from that of the German radi- 
cals. Representative institutions seemed 
to them hardly more than a makeshift, a 
miserable compromise between aristocra- 
cy and democracy. They dreamed of a 
pure democracy, in which the people 


should govern directly. In a congress of 
“Forty-eighters” held at Wheeling in 
September, 1852, a platform was adopted 
in which among a great many other things 
calculated to make the world over in pret- 
ty nearly every respect, the abolition of 
the presidency and the senate were de- 
manded because those institutions were 
contrary to democratic principles. Sim- 
ilar demands, as well as such things as 
the referendum and initiative, those fads 
of latter-day populism, were frequently 
advocated by the Radicals. There is some- 
thing deliciously naive in these proposi- 
tions for radical changes in our constitu- 
tion by men, most of whom had not yet 
been in the country long enough to be- 
come citizens. An anecdote told by Ju- 
lius Froebel may not be literally true, but 
illustrates perfectly the attitude of a con- 
siderable portion of these newcomers. He 
says that shortly after his arrival in New 
York he met on the street a gentleman 
who like himself had been a member of 
the Frankfurt parliament. “What, are 
you here too?” he cried. “When did you 
arrive?” “Last week” replied his friend, 
and continued : “But, listen, they manage 
things horribly in this country. And that 
is what they call a republic? Well, that 
must be changed t 66 

Of course, it was largely the small fry 
of the refugees who were guilty of such 
extravagances. The men of weight and 
ability among them, such as Froebel, 
Kapp, Hecker, Brentano and many others, 
had more modesty, and knew well enough 
that there was much for them to learn be- 
fore they could assume to teach the peo- 
ple among whom they had come. But 
these better men also looked at our politi- 
cal life through decidedly pessimistic 
glasses. One of the reasons therefor 
was the inveterate habit which some of 
the ablest preserved to the end, of looking 
at cis-Atlantic politics through European 


66 ) Froebel, Lebenslauf , I., page 280. 
















































































38 


spectacles. All political struggles were, 
to them, struggles between the aristocrat- 
ic and democratic principles. From this 
one-sided standpoint they were trying to 
find the aristocratic party in this country, 
and found k, at first in the Whigs with 
their economic tenets, and afterwards, 
when the slavery question overshadowed 
all others, in the Southern wing of the 
Democracy. 67 Whenever the actual facts 
did not tally with this preconceived nation, 
it seemed proof to those men, not that their 
theory was wrong, but that American pol- 
iticians were utterly corrupt and disloyal 
to their principles. From the same stand- 
point, it also appeared that the Catholic 
hierarchy, being on the side of the conti- 
nental governments in Europe, must in 
America side with the enemies of liberty ; 
and who could doubt that the monarchical 
governments themselves were intriguing 
to assist the allied aristocrats and ecclesi- 
astics in subverting the liberty of the Unit- 
ed States? This ingenious logic some- 
times went far enough actually to pro- 
pound the theory that the Southerners 
pushed the slavery question into the fore- 
ground, in order to keep the United States 
from adopting the policy of “intervention 
for non-intervention.” To do this they 
were persuaded by the Jesuits, at the in- 
stigation of the monarchical govern- 
ments. 68 

The relations of the refugee element to 
the political parties will be considered at 
a greater length in the succeeding chap- 
ter. Here we must treat briefly of two 
matters which have influenced very deep- 
ly the attitude of the “Forty-eighters,” as 
well as of the whole German element, to- 
wards our political and social institutions. 
These matters are what for want of a bet- 
ter term may be called Puritanism, and 
the Church. 


The enthusiastic sympathy which greet- 
ed the outbreak of the revolution of 1848 
and smoothed the path of the exiles dur- 
ing a few years thereafter, did not last 
very long. When the newcomers were 
somewhat settled in their new surround- 
ings, their peculiarities could not but jar 
upon the sensibilities of the astonished 
natives. As was seen above, modesty was 
by no means the chief virtue of German 
Radicals. Nor did they propose to adapt 
themselves meekly to the ways of those 
among whom they had settled. More- 
over, they were mostly young, without the 
cautious prudence that comes with age. 
By reason of their radicalism they had ex- 
ceedingly little respect for traditional cus- 
tom and social prejudice, in other words 
for “respectability.” Most of them rath- 
er enjoyed shocking the Philistines. 

And they did shock them. To be sure, 
there was nothing entirely new in those 
Sunday picnics and those convivial meet- 
ings at beer gardens and similar resorts, 
accompanied by music and speech-mak- 
ing, which became so prominent a part of 
German life in this country. For the last 
twenty years these things had been known 
in all those sections where German immi- 
gration was strong. But now there was 
added a certain spirit of defiance and a 
determined resistance to everything in 
our laws and institutions which stood in 
the way of the unhindered following of 
such customs. At the very time when an 
agitation for the introduction of “Maine 
laws” and other devices to combat by leg- 
islation the use of intoxicating beverages 
became popular among large classes, an 
opposition thereto sprang up which was 
based, not on expediency, but on princi- 
ple. To the average native American, 
the German customs were indications of 
vice and immorality, especially when it 


«7) See e. g. y the English preface to Kapp’s “ Geschichte der Sklaverei . ” 

68) Compare on these matters, inter alia, Kapp, “ Geschichte der Sklaverei the ar 
tides of Essellen in “ Atlantis." 



















































































































39 


was learned that the leaders in these 
things, the orators it those Sunday pic- 
nics, were men who openly expressed their 
contempt for churches and boasted of 
their “atheism.” As long as the Ger- 
mans in their saloons and beer gardens 
had been composed almost entirely of un- 
educated people, the prevailing attitude 
of Americans had been one of contempt. 
They found in those customs an ocular 
demonstration of the degradation in 
which the masses were kept by the monar- 
chies of effete Europe. But now, when 
the masses were seen to have leaders and 
spokesmen who were evidently educated 
and in many cases able, contempt became 
mingled with indignation. This was one 
of the causes which gave such an impetus 
to the nativistic and “Knownothing” 
movements during those years. 

It is of course clear that among the 
thousands of “Forty-eighters” there were 
individuals of all sorts, and it would be 
folly to deny that there were some whose 
characters tallied pretty well with the pic- 
ture of the class as it existed in the minds 
of a large number of Americans. That 
picture was as repulsive as possible — a 
compound of impiety, sensualism and 
grossness. At best, the popular view 
might be represented by the good-natured 
humor with which Charles G. Lelartd car- 
ricatured the type in “Hans Breitmann’s 
Ballads.” But if the ethical worth of the 
“Forty-eighters” as a class could be com- 
pared accurately with that of their native 
detractors, it is likely they would stand 
the test very well. The truth was that 
what is called in German the 'Weltan- 
schauung'' of the immigrants was so dif- 
ferent from anything the native Ameri- 
can mind was accustomed to, that it was 
almost impossible to find a common 
ground from which an understanding 
between the two classes could be had, un- 
til the “Forty-eighter” and the Puritan 
became united in a common hatred of 
slavery. 


In the preceding chapter it was stated 
that during the two decades before the 
revolution the minds of all educated Ger- 
mans had been under the influence of He- 
gel’s system of philosophy. The radical 
element, especially, drew its philosophi- 
cal nourishment from the bold deductions 
of the so-called Young-Hegelian school. 
During the last few years before and after 
1848, however, the bible by which the av- 
erage radical was disposed to swear was 
the works of Ludwig Feuerbach, in which 
the dogmatism of Hegel was replaced by 
an almost entirely negative criticism. In 
accordance with Feuerbach’s doctrines, 
the average “Forty-eighter” was con- 
vinced that all kinds of religion were 
merely the figments of the human imag- 
ination, all equally untrue. Belief in the 
existence of a deity was of the same char- 
acter. These men were very far from the 
modest attitude of a modern agnostic. 
They simply knew that there was no God. 
So far as there was a positive side to this 
philosophy, it was a more or less crude 
materialism. Just about this time the 
physical sciences rose to that overwhelm- 
ing importance in the public mind which 
they held during the later half of the cen- 
tury. Few of the refugees had received 
much training in physical science, but 
they fell in with the new tendency, and 
their publications are full of articles de- 
signed to popularize scientific facts. 

Probably most of the Radicals would 
have been ready to admit that religion, 
though it be all airy fantasy, had conferred 
much benefit on humanity in times past. 
But whatever may have been the case in 
former days, the Radicals were firmly con- 
vinced that mankind had now come to 
that stage where it needed stronger food 
than the fictions which sufficed in its in- 
fancy. Religion, in their eyes, had be- 
come an unmitigated evil. But as you 
could not very well fight religion in the 
abstract, the Radicals became the unconv 
promising enemies of the concrete repre- 


























































































































40 


sentatives of th« religious idea, in other 
words, the churches. In these more in- 
different days it takes an effort to under- 
stand the virulent hatred with which the 
Radicals of those years pursued priests 
and ministers. With the true spirit of 
the fanatic, they would not admit that a 
clergyman could be a sincere believer in 
the doctrines he taught. They maintain- 
ed that all churchmen were simply mem- 
bers of a gigantic conspiracy to keep the 
masses in mental bondage as the best 
means of upholding political oppression. 
A favorite term for a church was “Ver- 
diimmungs-Anstalt” which might be 
translated “stupidization institute,” and 
the worst term of. reproach was “ Pfatf ” 
( priest, with an opprobrious flavor) , 69 

In the fatherland, the churches were 
one of the principal conservative ele- 
ments ; and it was true enough that state- 
supported churches could not be but to 
some extent instruments of state policy. 
The Radicals drew no distinction between 
churches so situated and the independent 
churches of this country. Their fanati- 
cism condemned all alike, nor could they 
see much difference in principle between 
Catholicism and Protestantism. Yet it 
may be said that they hated the Catholic 
Church a little more, because they consid- 
ered it the stronger and more dangerous. 

Most of the new papers that sprang up 
after the “Forty-eighters” had come to 
this country devoted a large portion of 
their space to attacks upon churches and 


priests. Many, also, of the various liter- 
ary, social and other organizations domi- 
nated by Radicals had opposition to 
church influences as one of their main ob- 
jects. 70 The Catholic proposition to di- 
vide a part of the public school fund 
among the various denominations which 
maintained parochial schools found no 
more determined opponents than the Ger- 
man Radicals. But these did not limit 
their attacks to such legitimate matters of 
dispute. Everything connected with the 
church, from her dogmas to the private 
character of her priests, became the object 
of assault. The temper in which this 
feud was conducted varied from calm 
philosophical discussion in Essellen’s “At- 
lantis” to the most scurrilous abuse in 
such publications as Ludvigh’s “Packet” 
and Naprstek’s “Flugblaetter.” The 
German-speaking Catholics entered on the 
fight with equal zest and, on the whole, 
better temper and taste. In several places, 
e. g. in Cincinnati and Milwaukee, Catho- 
lic newspapers were started in opposition 
to those edited by Radicals. The contest 
was carried into private and business life. 
It expressed itself in various forms of boy- 
cotting. When a company composed 
largely of adherents of radicalism founded 
the little city of New Ulm in Minnesota 
in 1852, it was stated that they invited to 
the settlement all Germans except lawyers 
and priests ( Pfaffen ) 71 The result of 
this agitation was the introduction of a 
deep division among the German element, 


® 9 ) The enmity towards the Church persisted in many of these men even after their 
political radicalism had given place to much saner views. Friederich Kapp, for instance, 
never had his daughters baptized till after his return to Germany, in 1870, and then merely 
as a concession to local prejudices. Bamberger tells the characteristic story that the two 
young ladies, preparatory to the ceremony, were catechized by the clergyman, who was 
amazed to find that they knew so little of Christianity. “What, have you never heard of 
Jesus?’’ he gasped. “Oh, yes,’’ replied one of the girls, “papa says Jesus was a gentle- 
man!’’ Bamberger, Op. cit., page 202. 

70 ) See for instance the Verein Freier Manner , organized at Cincinnati in 1855, and 

from there spreading toother cities. Its constitution says, among other things: “The object 

of the association is to oppose a strong barrier, on the one hand to the encroachments and 
liberty-destroying aspirations of priestcraft, on the other hand to indifferentism and intel- 
lectual stagnation.’’ Meyer's Monatshefte , 1855, page 462. 

71 ) See “ Deutsche Pionier ,’’ IV., page 462. 
















































































































41 


which extended to all phases of life and 
made cooperation between these elements 
in business, politics and social affairs prac- 
tically impossible. This division persists 
to the present day, although the old bitter- 
ness has disappeared, and progressive 
Americanization is likely to heal the 
wounds at no distant day . 72 

While the “Forty-eighters” and their 
adherents were thus engaged in combat- 
ing the Roman Catholic hierarchy, they 
paid but little attention to the work of the 
Lutheran clergy, which during those 
years built up the powerful chain of con- 
gregations and synods which we know 
to-day. Lutheran orthodoxy was quite 
as distasteful to the Radicals as Roman 
Catholicism. But it was the day of small 
things for the Lutherans, especially in the 
West, and they probably seemed of little 
importance to the Radicals. The Eng- 
lish-speaking Protestant churches aroused 
the ire of the “Forty-eighters” especially 
because they were the principal upholders 
of Sunday and prohibition legislation, and 
against both these features of “Puritan- 
ism” the Radicals made a determined 
stand. They shared with the masses of 
their countrymen an aversion to laws that 
interfered with their social customs, and 
in addition they held that all these sump- 
tuary laws, so-called, were incompatible 
with that individual freedom which they 
considered the highest social and political 
good, and on which they conceived 
American institutions to be built. 

To the average American mind, the 


open defiance of the customs of the land, 
with regard to Sunday observance; the 
open indulgence in beer and wine, in the 
presence of women and children, who to 
some extent took part in these pleasures ; 
and to crown all this, the avowal of “athe- 
ism” and “infidelity” was nothing less 
than proof of total depravity. The wel- 
come which the victims of monarchical 
oppression had found at first was turned 
into strong aversion, and on the part of 
many, into fierce enmity. The. “Know- 
nothing” movement was directed as much 
against the German “infidel” as against 
the Roman Catholic. The breaking up of 
peaceful German picnic parties by gangs 
of rowdies, which had been a common 
thing during former outbreaks of nativ- 
istic hostility, occurred more frequently 
than ever. In self-defense it was 
proposed that Germans should arm 
themselves. Especially among the 
“Turners”™ an agitation arose for or- 
ganized, armed resistance to such 
outrages . 74 This aided in the rise of the 
legend that the “foreigners” were arming 
to destroy American institutions by force. 
With fine disregard of facts and possibili- 
ties, it was soon believed by some that the 
“Holy Alliance” was behind the increase 
in immigration during recent years . 78 
When “Knownothingism” became a po- 
litical power, election riots in which for- 
eigners, without regard to whether they 
were Catholics, Protestants or Infidels, 
were murdered by the score, became of or- 
dinary occurrence in some parts of the 


72 ) An excellent picture of these fights is given in Koss, Milwaukee. The author is 
very evidently in sympathy with the Radicals, however. Although his story is local in its 
nature, it is a type of similar contentions which took place whenever there were considerable 
numbers of Radicals and Catholics. 

73 ) The Nord-Amerikanische Turnerbund is the most successful and permanent of the 
many associations organized or dominated by the Radical element. On its nature and his- 
tory, see M. D. Learned, the German- American Turner Lyric, in Publications of the Society 
for the History of the Germans in Maryland, X., page 79. The article has a good collation 
of its sources. 

7i ) “ Galveston Zeitung," August 19, 1855. See Busey, Immigration, page 28. 

75 ) See Schmeckebier, The Knownothings in Maryland, Johns Hopkins University 
Studies, 1899. 





























































































42 


country. The details of these shameful 
happenings belong to the history of 
“Knownothingism” rather than that of 
the “Forty-eighters.” 

In more respectable quarters than those 
of “Knownothings” the doings of the Ra- 
dicals aroused alarm also. How the re- 
spectable element of native Americans 
was impressed may be illustrated by a 
quotation from an article from the pen of 
J. B. Angell, in the North American Re- 
view : 7 ® 

“The free-thinker of Tuebingen is 
here an editor who regards none of the 
courtesies of our own life, nor any of 
our most hallowed customs and beliefs. 
This is no exaggeration. Many a Ger- 
man is amazed and grieved at the great 
moral contrasts between multitudes of 
immigrants and the quiet citizens at 
home .” 77 

Utterances of this kind were common 
and seem to reflect temperate public opin- 
ion with accuracy. From this opinion 
sprang occasional attempts at missionary 
work among the Germans. For instance, 
at Louisville, a committee of Presbyteri- 
ans issued a call for an organization “to 
save the Germans, to make them true 
Christians through the various evangelic 
churches in this country, and thoroughly 
Americanize them .” 78 Such attempts, 
conceived in profound ignorance of the 
character of the German element and the 
conditions prevailing among them, re- 
mained without results. 

While thus the activity of the refugee 
element among the Germans attracted 
the attention of native Americans, it must 
by no means be understood that they 
were the real leaders of the mass of their 
countrymen. Among those affiliated with 


the Catholic Church, they found, of 
course, nothing but bitter hostility, and 
the Catholics were estimated at one-third 
of the German element . 70 The large 
numbers of peasants from Northern and 
Eastern Germany, who took up farms 
or remained in the cities as laborers, were 
utterly impervious to radical and infidel 
influences. They were then as now the 
mainstay of Lutheranism. The most 
fruitful field for radical ideas both in re- 
ligion and politics, was found among the 
skilled workmen of the cities. The well- 
to-do business element, also, may be said 
to have felt a mild sympathy with the 
anti-religious ideas of the Radicals. But 
political Radicalism was abhorrent to this 
class, and their attitude towards the 
Church was that of indifferentism rather 
than hostility. Thus it will be seen that 
the influence of the Radicals was not alto- 
gether proportionate to the noise they 
made. Still they were the most conspicu- 
ous men among the Germans in all public 
activities. The Catholics and other 
church people had a tendency of separat- 
ing themselves from the rest of their coun- 
trymen, and taking part in public affairs 
only when their own immediate interests 
were at stake. “Forty-eighters” were 
the orators at most German festivities; 
they dominated in many singing societies, 
social clubs and other organizations that 
had nothing in particular to do with re- 
ligion or politics, but gave its leading 
spirits opportunities for becoming known 
and influential ; furthermore, they edited 
most of the German papers. In this way 
it came about that the refugee element 
could bring to the support of the anti- 
slavery cause the votes and influence of 
thousands of their countrymen who had 
no particular sympathy with Radicalism. 


76 ) North American Review, vol. 82, page 259. (1856). 

77 ) See also Christian Inquirer, May 31, 1851, which refers particularly to the Ger- 
man press of that time. 

78 ) Eickhoff, “/« der Neuen Heimath ,” page 227. 

79) See Loeher, Op. cit ., page 433. This refers to a somewhat earlier period, but the 
proportion seems to have been about constant. Accurate statistics are not in existence. 













































































































43 


How this was done will be the main 
subject of the next chapter. 

CHAPTER V. 

The Struggle Against Slavery. 

In the third chapter the reasons were 
set forth, why the German element in gen- 
eral, and particularly the political refu- 
gees of the earlier period, with few ex- 
ceptions became Jacksonian Democrats. 
For a number of years after the coming of 
the “Forty-eighters,” the same causes re- 
tained sufficient force to lead most of the 
newcomers also into the arms of the same 
party. Yet in the very year 1848, the 
slavery question for the first time caused 
a split in the ranks. The “Barnburner” 
section of the New York Democracy 
carried a number of leading Germans of 
that state to the support of Van Buren, 
the freesoil candidate, for president, and 
a similar secession took place in other 
states, notably in Wisconsin, where the 
Freesoilers, with the help of numerous 
Germans, won a notable success. 80 But 
the freesoil movement was abortive in 
the long run. As the influence of the 
new arrivals spread, and at the same time 
the slavery question pushed itself more 
and more into the foreground, there arose 
a struggle between the older leaders of 
the German element and the “Forty-eight- 
ers” who desired to supplant them, simi- 
lar to the fight by which the refugees of 
1830 had had to dispute thfe leadership 
with the “old settlers” of that day. This 
struggle became known among German - 


Americans as the fight between the Grays 
and the Greens. The Grays had the ad- 
vantage of a longer residence in the coun- 
try, greater familiarity with conditions, 
greater wealth and old established connec- 
tions. The Greens, on the other hand, 
were their superiors in numbers and en- 
thusiasm. They had no personal reasons 
to attach themselves to any particular 
party organization, while the Grays, by 
reason of habit and the manifold person- 
al interests which party affiliation creates, 
found it difficult to sever their connection 
with the Democracy, even where they be- 
came more and more disgusted with the 
growing pro-slavery leanings of the party. 
The inexperience of the Greens led them 
to favor all sorts of Utopian schemes, in- 
cluding the German State idea, which 
most of the Grays had happily outgrown. 
Nor did the radicalism of the Greens, 
their notions about changing the Consti- 
tution of the United States to a pure 
Democracy, find favor in the eyes of their 
predecessors, let alone the Socialistic 
proclivities of a part of the newcomers. 81 
In return for the cold water which the 
Grays poured over these exuberances, 
the Greens attacked their opponents in 
bitter tirades, charging them with being 
traitors to the German nationality, with 
having no love for anything except their 
own pecuniary interests. Even the ac- 
cusation of playing into the hands of the 
knownothings was not lacking. 82 

Those among the Radicals who found 
it impossible to identify themselves with 
the Democratic party, were at a loss for a 


8°) See T. C. Smith, the Freesoil Party in Wisconsin, Proceedings Wisconsin State 
Historical Society. 1894. 

81) The most prominent individual in the Socialistic wing of the refugees was William 
Weitling, who has been mentioned above. He published a number of Socialistic papers in 
New York and died there in 1871. On the relations of German with American Socialists of 
that time, see “Deutsche Pionier ,” IV., page 389. The New York Tribune for a while had 
pretty close connection with some of these men. Karl Marx was its regular European cor- 
respondent. Before that time, in 1848, Albert -Brisbane, the Fourierist and friend of Horace 
Greeley, went to Germany and took part in Socialistic agitation in connection with Marx, 
Anneke and others. 

82) See on this point, e. g ., an article .in “Atlantis III., page 109. (August 1855). 
























































































44 


long time as to what party they should 
support. They were determined to have 
nothing to do with an organization that 
lent itself to the support of slavery. The 
'‘Barnburner” Democracy was local and 
by no means distinguished by that heroic 
loyalty to principle, which Radical enthu- 
siasm demanded. The Freesoil party was 
ephemeral and ineffective. The aboli- 
tionists proper, in their different varieties, 
were well enough as far as the slavery 
question went. But unfortunately the at- 
mosphere of abolition circles was very 
much impregnated with that Puritanism 
which was distasteful above all oth£r 
things to German Radicals. How could the 
materialism and infidelity of the “Forty- 
eighter” be mated with the religious zeal 
of the average Abolitionist? As to join- 
ing the Whigs, that also was out of the 
question. In the first place, the Whig 
party of 1852 was no more outspoken in 
its anti-slavery sentiment than the De- 
mocracy. All the reasons which had in 
the past kept Germans of all sorts away 
from the Whigs still held good. In ad- 
dition the Whig candidate for president, 
Gen. Winfield Scott, had a rather bad 
record on the question of nativism. 83 
Some of the refugees, to be sure, and am- 
ong them some of the best, like Julius 
Froebel and Friedrich Kapp, did ally 
themselves with the Whig party. But 
they did so at the post of losing for the 
time being most of their influence with 
the German element. 84 The Whigs never 
ceased their attempts of gaining votes 
among the Germans, and Whig papers 


of ephemeral life were started in the Ger- 
man centers again and again, to die as 
soon as financial support by the party or- 
ganization was withdrawn. The editors 
of such papers were sometimes refugees 
who were driven by pecuniary necessities 
into accepting such positions against their 
convictions. 88 

Under these circumstances not a few 
of the Radicals conceived the idea of 
forming an independent party of their 
own. Attempts at such an organization 
were made at several conventions held 
under Radical auspices. The “Bund 
Freier Maenner,” a Radical association 
originating at Louisville and spreading 
through most of the Western states, held 
state conventions in Wisconsin, Ken- 
tucky, Ohio, Texas, Indiana and Illinois 
during the summer of 1853. 86 The plat- 
forms adopted at these and similar meet- 
ings were on the whole alike to those of 
the Wheeling convention of 1852, men- 
tioned above, except that less prominence 
was given to the Radical programme of 
constitutional changes, and more to the 
struggle against slavery. At the same 
time the German press was full of dis- 
cussions about the proper place of the 
Germans in politics. On the whole it 
seems that a majority even of the Greens 
realized that an independent German 
party would simply mean that the in- 
fluence of the “Fortv-eighters,” who 
would lead that party, would be reduced 
to a minimum. About this time, also, it 
became clear to many that an agitation 
for radical principles, conducted exclus- 


®) During the campaign an old letter of his was unearthed in which he said: “I now 

hesitate between extending the period of residence before naturalization and a total repeal of 
all acts of Congress on the subject. My mind inclines to the latter.” Besides, he was 
charged with having hung, unjustly, fifteen Germans during the Mexican war. See Rhodes’ 
History of the United States, I., pp. 273, 276. 

84 ) See Froebel, Lebenslauf; Aus America, passim. 

85) E. g., the case of Roesler, a former member of the Frankfurter parliajnent, who ed- 

ited a Whig campaign paper in Milwaukee, in 1852. When he was upbraided for this by 
some friends, he replied: ‘‘You don’t know how hunger hurts.” Wagner & Scherzer, Reisen 

in Sord-Amtrika , page 126. 

08) See “Atlantis,” I., page 232. 






























45 


ively in the German language, would 
have but a very slight and indirect effect 
on the American people. Consequently, 
a number of attempts were made to found 
periodicals in which German radical prin- 
ciples in religion and politics should be 
discussed in the English tongue. The 
journals so founded were all ot them 
short-lived. The most interesting of them 
was the “American Liberal,” published 
for a while by Christian Essellen, i» con- 
junction with the “Atlantis” 

It was not until the introduction of the 
Kansas-Nebraska bill that these blind 
gropings began to be replaced by more 
definite and efficient political activity. At 
first the opposition to the scheme of 
Senator Douglas was practically unani- 
mous among the Germans. According to 
Von Holst, there were in the spring of 
1854 among eighty-eight German news- 
papers in the country just eight in favor 
of the bill while eighty were decidedly op- 
posed to it. 87 There can be little doubt 
that this proportion was an accurate re- 
flection of the popular feeling among the 
Germans. As time went on a large num- 
ber of the editors felt themSelves con- 
strained to change their position with re- 
gard to “squatter sovereignty,” for too 
many papers were dependent for their 
existence on party support. Douglas’ 
condemnation of the pro-slavery out- 
rages in Kansas made the change easier 
for them, and it may be said that until 
his death the “Little Giant” from Illinois 
had no more enthusiastic admirers than 
the German Democrats throughout the 
country. 88 But nevertheless that original 
outburst of anti-slavery feeling on the 
part of the German press was significant. 
It marked the time when the German 
element ceased to be practically solid on 


the side of the Democratic party. Those 
attempts at forming an independent 
German party, which had taken so much 
of the energy of the “Forty-eighters” 
during the year 1853, had been much like 
the operations of a body of officers with- 
out an army. Now the army began to 
form behind the leaders. Thousands of 
German voters began to feel that the 
Radicals were right, that the Democratic 
party was nothing but the servant of the 
Southern plantation aristocracy. 

Not only did the “Forty-eighters“ find 
their body of followers ; they found also 
a larger organization of which they could 
become a part. During the spring and 
summer of 1854 the Republican party 
took its rise, and the “Forty-eighters,” 
with a practical unanimity that was not 
often obtained among that disputatious 
and opinionated crew, hastened to make 
themselves a part of the new organiza- 
tion. It speaks well for the kernel of po- 
litical commonsense and insight that was 
hidden, after all, behind their shell of 
extravagances, that the Radicals were so 
ready to join with the first organization 
which placed itself avowedly and without 
reservation on the principle of opposition 
to slavery extension. For aside from that 
one principle, there was hardly any senti- 
ment in common between the majority of 
the new party and their Radical allies. 
But the German idealists had learned 
their first lesson in practical politics, to- 
wit: That in order to gain anything at 
all, you must not insist on having every- 
thing you may deem desirable. 

The rise of the Republican party gave 
renewed vigor to the struggle between 
the Grays and the Greens. While almost 
without exception the “Forty-eighters” 
threw themselves into the arms of the 


87) Von Holst, Constitutional History of the United States, IV., page 420. 

88) This was so, although in the very year 1854 he laid himself open to charges of na- 
tivistic tendencies by voting against the proposition to allow foreigner# who had merely de- 
clared their intention to become citizens to participate in the benefits of a homestead bill then 
pending in Congress. 


















































































































new organization, 8 * and not a few of the 
older refugees did the same thing, the 
Grays, generally speaking, were too 
closely connected, with the Democratic 
party by personal interest and habit to 
make such a course possible. They be- 
came staunch supporters of “squatter 
sovereignty,” and were aided in their 
efforts to combat Republicanism by the 
Catholic element. In the eyes of the lat- 
ter, the Republican party became almost 
from the beginning identified with their 
hated enemies, the “Forty-eighters,” and 
to thi$ day almost every German Catholic 
in the country is a Democrat. 

One advantage the Forty-eighters de- 
rived from the rise of the new party was 
that their papers now had a source of 
financial support such as the Democratic 
party was to the Grays. Few of the 
many new* papers springing up in the 
German centers were independent of such 


assistance. The correspendence of Mr. 
Carl Schurz affords some interesting 
glimpses into the difficulties of keeping 
them going .® 0 On the whole the Demo- 
cratic German press continued to have 
the advantage, financially ; largely, mo 
doubt, for the reason that these papers 
were older and well established. The fol- 
lowing comment by Mr. Essellen is char- 
acteristic of the situation: “While the 
Liberal German papers, surely the great 
majority of German -American papers, 
often lead a miserable life (we are of the 
opinion that there are too many of the 
little Western sheets) . . . the Hunker 
sheets have a life of pleasure. Never- 
theless it is a strange phenomenon that 
the latter are often embarrassed to find 
editors.” The writer adds that at the 
present time two Democratic papers, 
“Michigan Demokrat” and “Philadelphia 
Demokrat,” are thus orphaned .® * 1 The ob- 


M) About the only prominent “Forty-eighter” who remained until the outbreak of the 
civil war a faithful adherent of the “Straight” Democracy was Oswald Ottendorfer, of the 
“ New York Staatszeitung." 

9°) See letter of Carl Schurz to F. J. Potter, dated August 12, 1859, published Mil- 
waukee Sentinel, April 1, 1900, and in Hense-Jensen, “ Wisconsin's Deutsch-Amerikaner y " 
vol, I., page 317. Also the following unpublished letter of Carl Schurz to John H. Tweedy, 
now in possession of Henry E. Legler of Milwaukee: 

John H. Tweedy, Esq. Watertown, Sept. 30th, 1857. 

My Dear Sir: It was my intention to call on you tomorrow, but some appointments I 

shall have to fill for the Governor, oblige me to visit the Northern part of the state. I wish 
to call your attention again to the necessity of doing something for our German-Republican 
papers, of which the “Atlas” and the “Watertown Volkszeitung” are the most important 
and the worst in danger of going down. About $200 have been subscribed by the candidates 
and a few other friends for the purpose of covering certain notes which I have endorsed and 
which will fall to my charge if not taken care of by the party. I have helped the papers 
.along with money and endorsements as long as I could, but my sacrifices have been already 
so heavy and so disproportionate to my means that I must look to the party for help. We 
cannot get along without those papers; they will be able to sustain themselves if relieved of 
their debts, and I think no effort ought to be spared. The “Volkszeitung” here needs some 
aid immediately or it will have to stop even before election. I saw Brigham at Madison, and 

I wish you would communicate with him and the Young Men’s Rep. Club. I am somewhat 
heavily involved with those two papers, and after all I have done, it can hardly be expected 
that I, under existing circumstances, shcfcpld run the German Rep. press of the state at my 
private expense. Besides, I am entirely unable to take up any more of the notes. One of 
them is already past due and in Noonan’s hands. If you would give some attention to this 
matter you would do a good work for the cause. The papers must be sustained; they are in 
themselves strongholds which we cannot afford to lose. 

I shall probably have the pleasure of seeing you before the end of the week. If you 
can raise some money for the “Volkszeitung” without delay, however much or little it may 
be, it will be a good investment. Yours truly, C. Schurz. 

91) li Atlantis y " III., page 178. (August, 1855). 


























































































47 


servation was probably strictly true. The 
overwhelming majority of educated Ger- 
man emigrants during the last* seven 
years had been either political refugees 
or held convictions similar to them ; and 
this element became Republican almost 
without exception. 

While thus the most intelligent portion 
of the Germans, and particularly the po- 
litical refugees, cast their weight into the 
balance for the nascent Republican party, 
it was by no means an easy task for them 
to carry an appreciable number of 
German voters along. As far as mere 
numbers were concerned they were al- 
most a negligeable quantity — a few thous- 
ands, scattered through nearly every state 
of the Union. They were, moreover, 
comparatively new arrivals. In the far 
Western states, notably Wisconsin and 
Iowa, this made little difference because 
these sections had been but recently set- 
lled and few of their countrymen had 
much the better of them, as far as length' 
of residence was concerned. But in the 
older centres of German-American life, 
such as New York, Philadelphia and Cin- 
cinnati, their opponents could bring to 
bear all the advantage the old settler had 
in business and social relations. The sen- 
timental attachments, also, which the 
older German residents felt towards the 
Democratic party must not be underrated. 
That party had always stood by the for- 
eigner in his struggles against nativism. 
Everything which the Germans had 
gained in recognition of their interests as 
a nationality, the instruction in their 
mother tongue which the public schools 
afforded to their children, the relaxation 
of the Sabbath laws, the successful op- 
position to prohibition legislation, all was 
gained with the help of the Democracy. 
Now came a crowd of newcomers, of 
greenhorns, barely become citizens, some 
of them not long enough in the country 
for that even, men who had no personal 
knowledge of what the Democracy had 


done for me Germans during the last 
twenty-five years, and denounced that 
party as hostile to human progress, as the 
upholder of oppression and slavery, as 
the enemy of liberty. It was not very easy 
for the average German voter to believe 
that tale. 

As was the obvious course of political 
prudence*, it became the policy of the 
German Democrats to minimize the im- 
portance of the slavery issue. That was 
fa local quesetion, according to them, with 
which the people of the free states had 
nothing to do. As far as the introduction 
of slavery into the territories was con- 
cerned, that would regulate itself. There 
was no danger of it because it would not 
pay. The only true policy was that of 
popular sovereignty in each territority, as 
advocated by that great statesman and 
true champion of liberty, Senator Doug- 
las. Such became the tenor of German 
“Hunker” arguments after the behests of 
political expediency had repressed the 
first outburst of genuine feeling caused 
by the introduction of the Kansas- 
Nebraska bill. There could be no doubt 
that the German voters were almost un- 
animous in their aversion to slavery. The 
only means of preventing them from 
going over to the anti-slavery party en 
masse was to keep prominently before 
their eyes the danger of nativism and 
prohibitionism. 

Accordingly, the Democratic speakers 
and writers avoided as much as possible 
the discussion of the slavery question and 
dwelt the more frequently on the issues 
more hopeful from their standpoint. 
Never since the nativistic movement had 
arisen had there been a greater apparent 
danger from that side. The Knownoth- 
ing order, fighting in the dark and ap- 
pearing the more formidable on account 
of the mystery attaching to it; and the 
“American” party, powerful especially in 
the border states, gained overwhelming 
victories in several parts of the country, 




































48 


obtaining majorities in several legis- 
latures and municipalities. The move- 
ment acquired a strong foothold in Con- 
gress. Although it did not succeed in 
passing much legislation hostile to for- 
eign-bom citizens, the danger of such 
measures becoming law seemed immi- 
nent. Wherever the American party reach- 
ed the ascendency, the worst elements of 
demagogism became rampant. Although 
occasionally a man of character, standing 
and ability identified himself with the 
movement,- as a rule leaders and followers 
belonged to the worst class of low poli- 
ticians, and their deeds were a queer com- 
mentary on their tirades against the “for- 
eign mobs,” upon whose shoulders they 
tried to load all responsibility for what- 
ever corruption and evil existed in public 
life. Murder, arson, riots and election 
frauds were the ordinary weapons of the 
“Americans.” The outrages of a former 
period, the burning of the convent at 
Charleston, Mass., and the Philadelphia 
riots of 1844, were eclipsed by the blood- 
shed and other crimes in Baltimore, 
Louisville and elsewhere. At Louisville, 
on election day (August 4) in the year 

1855, city was in the hands of a mob 
which killed a number of Germans and 
Irish, and injured many others, including 
women and children. A committee of 
the Common Council, appointed to in- 
vestigate the outrages, made the in- 
genious discovery that the whole blame 
should be laid at the door of “foreigners, 
papists and infidels” whose houses were 
said to be arsenals from which Americans 
had been fired on.® 2 

Occurrences of this kind were very 
common during the years from 1850 to 

1856. It was inevitable, therefore, that 
they must have a determining influence 


on the political action of the German ele- 
ment. The Radicals could no more 
escape attaching the utmost importance 
to it than the most inveterate “Hunker.” 
No German, however able or popular, 
could hope to become or continue to be 
a leader of his countrymen, unless he op- 
posed to the utmost every vestige of 
knownothing sentiment. If the Demo- 
cracy could succeed in making the 
German masses believe that the new Rep- 
publican party was esentially a know- 
nothing organization, the ablest and most 
impassioned anti-slavery arguments of 
the “Forty-eighters” would not be likely 
to gain a single German vote for that 
cause. 

Knownothing sentiments were by no 
means confined to the organization known 
as the “American” party. What remnants 
of the Whigs still existed after the defeat 
of 1852 were full of navitists. Not 
seldom nativistic leanings were found 
even in the Democratic ranks, a matter 
which was duly exploited by the “Forty- 
eighters.” For instance, in a Democratic 
city convention held at Cincinnati, March 
24, 1857, it was claimed by the German 
Republicans that there were ninety know- 
nothings against ninety-four “German 
and Irish” delegates. However that may 
have been, there were strong protests in 
that convention against questioning can- 
didates with regard to their views on the 
knownothing issue. 93 The custom of , 
catechizing candidates on these points 
had become quite common during recent 
years. 94 

The period from the defeat of Gen. 
Scott to the presidential campaign of 
1856 was a period of uncertainty for all 
who sought some organization with 
which they could ally themselves in op- 


See, among other places, Eickhoff, In der Neuen Heimath , page 227. Schmecke- 
bier, Knownothinga in Maryland; Hennighauseir, Reminiscences, etc., Hth and 12th Annual 
Reports, Society for the History of the Germans in Maryland. 

93) “ Cincinnati Volksblatt" March 27, 1857. 

94) See, e. g. t the Baltimore case commented on by Busey, Immigration, page 26. 






















































































49 


position to the. Democracy. The “Amer- 
ican" party, notwithstanding its ephem- 
eral successes, obviously lacked the con- 
ditions that would make it a permanent 
factor in politics. Moreover, it did not 
recognize the truth that the time had 
come when the slavery question must 
overshadow all other issues. From its 
very nature, it had no room for foreign- 
born anti-slavery men. When the Repub- 
lican party began to crystallize, during 

# 

the summer of 1854, the “Americans’ in 
the Northern states, or at least those who 
had anti-slavery sentiments, at once be- 
gan to leave its ranks and flock into the 
new organization in great numbers. In 
addition to this nativistic element, it was 
evident that the anti-slavery Whigs who 
were everywhere the nucleus of the Re- 
publican hosts, were to a great extent 
zealous advocates of prohibition and 
strict enforcement of the Sabbath laws. 
Here was the opportunity of the Demo- 
crats. By constantly harping on these 
undeniable facts, they endeavored to keep 
the German voters from al>andoning the 
party to which they had so long been 
loyal. The German Republicans, on the 
other hand, found themselves confronted 
with a double task. On the one hand they 
had to inspire the indifferent masses of 
their countrymen with their own fervent 
anti-slavery zeal. On the other hand they 
had to be constantly on guard to keep 
tneir own party from following the in- 
clination of so many of its members to 
run off into the knownothing and pro- 
hibition by-ways. 

The odds were almost overwhelming 
against the little band of fighter^ for 
human liberty. That in the face of such 
difficulties they succeeded in gaining over 
to the Republican side as many Germans 
as they did ; that they obtained for their 
followers the balance of power in a num- 
ber of Northern states, certainly in Wis- 
consin and Illinois, and probably also in 
Iowa and Ohio, and thereby made the 


final success of the Republican party pos- 
sible; that they accomplished all this is 
evidence not only of their loyalty and 
devotion, but also of the very great 
amount of political ability which was 
found in their ranks. That the best am- 
ong them, such men as Kapp, Muench, 
Hecker, Koerner, Hassaurek and others, 
did not become more conspicuous than 
they did in the history of the United 
States must be ascribed to the circum- 
stance that they never succeeded in being 
considered apart from their leadership of 
a special element of voters. Such special 
relationship, while it is an advantage in 
the first few steps of a political career, is 
a serious drawback later on. Moreover, 
their leadership among the Germans kept 
them from ever becoming as thoroughly 
Americanized as they might have become. 
In fact some of them, as Kapp for in- 
stance, never considered themselves any- 
thing but Europeans, and finally returned 
to their native country to live. Of this 
whole generation of politicians, Mr. 
Schurz is almost the only one who out- 
grew the limitations imposed by his for- 
eign birth. 

The identification of the “Forty- 
eighters" with the anti-slavery struggle 
had a decidedly broadening effect on these 
men themselves. They had at last found 
real political work to do, and yet were not 
obliged to become disloyal to their high 
political ideals. Thus their true political 
ability found an opportunity to display it- 
self. Those radical extravagances fell 
away from them one by one. As soon as 
the work of the new party was fairly un- 
der way, we hardly find a word in the 
writings and speeches of “Forty-eighters” 
about changes in the constitution and 
similar dreams. Only a few impractica- 
bles, like Karl Heinzen, carried on the old 
futile agitation and soon stood entirely 
isolated. Or a man here and there, who 
came dangerously near being a “crank," 
would destroy his usefulness by a petulant 

















































































































50 


display of ultra loyalty to “radical prin- 
ciples,” like Struve.® 5 But nearly all of 
them were now fully launched on the 
stream of real American politics, and 
found there quite enough work to occupy 
their energies. 

The fight with the Catholics, which had 
been carried on so vigorously by most of 
them during the earlier years, now be- 
came a source of much embarrassment. 
It made it impossible for them to gain a 
single convert among this class and forced 
them into a three-cornered battle when 
they opposed the knownothings. The 
following expressions by Essellen may 
illustrate their difficulty. After referring 
to the knownothing riots in Cincinnati in 
the spring of 1855 and declaring that the 
nativist movement threatened to result in 
a civil war, he continues : “Yet we would 
net wish that Irishmen and Germans 
should stand together in a struggle that 
must be decisive for the freedom of 
America. This alliance does not become 
the honor of the German name.” 96 The 
Radical's objection was, of course, not to 
the nationality of such allies, but to 
their Catholic religion. 

But notwithstanding such embarrass- 
ments, the “Forty-eighters" went to 
work vigorously to assist in organizing 


the Republican party, in keeping the new 
organization out of the knownothing rut, 
and now and then to gain some local ad- 
vantage for themselves. Thus at the 
Cincinnati municipal election mentioned 
above, Hassaurek 07 was elected as an in- 
dependent candidate to the Common Coun- 
cil, over a Democrat accused of nativistic 
tendencies. The formative period of the 
Republican party was rather protracted. 
After the beginning had been made in 
Wisconsin, Michigan and Vermont, other 
states followed but slowly, .and not until 
February 22, 1856, was it possible to effect 
a national organization, at a mass conven- 
tion held in Pittsburg. Another quotation 
from Essellen’s “Atlantis" may show how 
the situation looked to a<“Forty-eighter” 
in the Fall of 1855: “We have observed 
on several occasions that the so-called 
Republican party, both in Ohio and else- 
where, does not form a definite, finished 
party, with a definite program, but 
rather an association of various 
parties and factions, held together only 
by a negative cement, to-wit : opposition 
to slavery 1 extension. The idea at the 
foundation of this union is correct. For 
opposition to the encroachments of the 
slave-holders’ party is the most pressing 
demand of American politics and the best 
basis of new party formations. But for 


®5) Gustav v. Struve had been, next to Hecker, the most prominent of the ultra- Demo- 
cratic leaders. In September, 1848, he attempted a second Republican insurrection in Ba- 
den, was defeated by the government forces, taken prisoner, but liberated by a mob. He es- 
caped to Switzerland, and in 1851 came to New York, where he engaged in literary work. 
Among other things he published a universal history in six volumes, probably the most ambi- 
tious German work ever published in the United States, except Schem’s Conversations-Lexikon. 
After the outbreak of the civil war he was given a commission in the 8th New York Regi- 
ment, but resigned when his colonel, Blenker, was promoted and succeeded by Prince Salm- 
Salm. The reason he gave was that he would not serve under a prince! In 1863, Struve was 
appointed consul at Sonneberg, but the government of the Duke of Coburg-Gotha refused the 
exequatur. Struve returned to Germany, however, where he lived at Meiningen until his 
death. He was a phrenologist, a vegetarian, and seems to have been hardly quite well bal- 
anced, mentally. 

*®) “Atlantis," II., page 230. (March 1855). 

Friedrich Hassaurek, born in 1832, took part in the Vienna insurrection of 1848 
and came to Cincinnati in March of the following year. He became editor, first of th$ “ Hoch- 
wtLchUr and afterwards the “ Volksblatt." Under Lincoln, he was minister to Ecuador. 















. 




































































































































51 


the present this union looks rather 
chaotic. There are in it many elements 
with which we adopted citizens cannot 
make friends. But instead of being de- 
terred by such disagreeable admixtures 
from taking part in the new formation of 
parties, we ought rather by zealous parti- 
cipation in the movements for reform try 
to gain such influence in them that the im- 
pure elements will be pushed out of the 
reform party." 98 The advice contained 
in the last sentence was pretty well fol- 
lowed. All over those Northern states 
where there were large numbers of 
German _r oters “Forty-eighters" were 
conspicuous among Republican workers, 
and everywhere, in conventions and mass 
meetings, they insisted on committing the 
party against nativism. For instance, ill 
Ohio, they succeeded in having such 
resolutions passed by the local conven- 
tions in Toledo, in Sandusky, in Tusca- 
rawas County and elsewhere. In Wis- 
consin, it was understock from the 
beginning that without the help of 
German votes the Republicans could not 
win, even in this Western stronghold of 
the new party, and a German was placed 
on every state ticket as a matter of 
course, as well as on local tickets of can- 
didates in all those counties where the 
Germans were massed. In this state, 
where there was then a larger proportion 
of foreign-born voters than anywhere 
else, all parties vied in declaring their 
opposition to nativistic encroachments on 
the rights of adopted citizens. For in- 
stance, in the legislature of 1857, where 
the Republicans had a majority, the Rep- 
ublican Allen moved a resolution instruct- 
ing the representatives of the state in 
Congress to vote against changes in the 
naturalization laws. At once a Democrat, 


Strong, amended the resolution so as to 
instruct the representatives to vote for 
a change in the laws making naturaliza- 
tion easier. The amended resolution was 
adopted. 99 

When the first national Republican con- 
vention met at Pittsburg, in 1856, for 
the purpose of effecting a national or- 
ganization, Charles Reemelin of Ohio 
seems to have been the only foreign-born 
German present. He belonged to the 
older generation of immigrants, 100 and 
was not strictly speaking a political re- 
fugee, but entirely in sympathy with the 
“Forty-eighters," as far as the slavery 
question was concerned. According to 
George W. Julian, no mean judge, his 
speech was “by far the strongest speech 
in the convention." He “arraigned know- 
nothingism as a scheme of bigotry and 
intolerance, and a mischievous side is- 
sue." 101 He was vigorously applauded, 
but the platform adopted by the con- 
vention was silent on that point, as indeed 
on everything except slavery extension. 
As the meeting contained numerous 
former members of the “American” 
party, this was perhaps the prudent 
course. The Philadelphia convention in 
June, which nominated Fremont for 
president, was a little bolder and em- 
bodied a mild plank against “proscriptive 
laws” in its platform.* 

By dint of hard work and never failing 
vigilance the German Republicans man- 


*E ditori al Note. — This resolution 
actually originated in Illinois. In the con- 
vention of Republican editors of Illinois, 
held in Decatur in February 1856, Georg 
Schneider, editor of the Illinois Staatszeitung, 
introduced a set of resolutions denouncing 
human slavery as well as proscriptive 


w ) “Atlantis,” III., page 164, (September 1855). 

W) Journal Wisconsin Assembly, 1857. 

1( X>) See supra, chapter II. 

101) G. W. Julian, The First Rep. National Convention, American Historical Review, 
IV,, page 318. 






















































































































52 


aged fairly well to keep the nativistic and 
prohibition sentiments out of the official 
utterances of the new party. But of 
course that did not keep the Democrats 
from insisting that these sentiments were 
present just the same, though concealed 
from motives of political expediency. 
While the same causes which gained 
Republican recruits among the native 
population had their effect on the 
German voters, the fear of nativism and 
prohibition kept this class from going 
over almost in a body, as they might very 

measures against foreign immigration, and 
it was due to his untiring efforts, able 
abetted as he was by John M. Palmer, Nor- 
man B. Judd, Burton C. Cooke and not the 
least by Abraham Lincoln, who told his old 
whig friends that Mr. Schneider’s resolu- 
tions contained nothing but what was laid 
down in the declaration of independence, 
that they were adopted in spite of the very 
large “American” element represented in the 
convention. In the celebrated Republican 
State convention held at Bloomington in 
Illinois in May following resolutions of th 
same liberal character were adopted and 
Mr. Schneider was elected a delegate at 
large to the Philadelphia convention, which 
nominated General Fremont for president. 
In this convention the “American” sentiment 
was still very strong, a large part of the 
delegates favoring an amalgamation with 
the American party, which with that very 
object in view held its national convention at 
the same time and place. But the Illinois 
delegates at once set to work to counteract 
this influence, and succeeded to elect the 
liberal-minded Henry Lane of Indiana for 
permanent chairman of the convention, who 
warmly favored the Illinois resolutions. 
These were embodied in the platform and 
were carried against the strenuous opposi- 
tion of Thaddens Stevens and others, who 
expressed the fear that they might offend the 
great “American” party of Pennsylvania. 
There is hardly any doubt that by the action 
of the convention the young republican party 
was purged of the greater part of non-pro- 
gressive elements and the way was paved 
for an overwhelming number of citizens of 
German descent to embrace the principles 
of the new party of liberty. 


likely have done if their dislike of slavery 
had had full sway. As it was, even those 
who became out-and-out Republicans in 
national politics nearly always retained 
sufficient independence to vote against 
their party in local elections whenever 
they thought it necessary as a protection 
against the dreaded spectres of Puritan- 
ism and Knownothingism. For instance, 
in the Ohio campaign in 1855, they sup- 
ported the Republican candidate for gov- 
ernor, Chase, but would have nothing to 
da with the rest of the state ticket, the 
candidates on it being suspected of nativ- 
ism. In the following year a similar 
thing occurred in Baltimore. There the 
German paper, “Der Wecker,” was the 
only Republican journal in the State. 
Under the successive editorship of Wil- 
helm Rapp and Franz Sigel, both “Forty- 
eighters,” it was bold and urtcompromis- 
ing in its anti-slavery advocacy and made 
a specialty of working for the homestead 
bill, which the Republican party favored. 
Fremont had its enthusiastic support for 
the presidency. But in all local elections 
it favored the Democratic tickets without 
reserve, and the Germans of Baltimore 
continued to vote with that party in 
sheer self-defense against the “Amer- 
icans” who were nowhere more turbulent 
and bloodthirsty than in Maryland. 

During the presidential campaign of 
1856, the “Forty-eighters” were every- 
where conspicuous in the support of Fre- 
mont. Friedrich Hecker, the chief of the 
first Baden insurrection, was a candidate 
with Abraham Lincoln on the Re- 
publican electoral ticket in Illinois, 
and went on the stump in others be- 
sides his home state. Thus he spoke at 
a meeting in Philadelphia, together with 
Reinhold Solger, of Boston, and at the 
Academy of Music in New York with 
Friedrich Muench and Gustav Struve, 
where Froebel presided. 102 Koerner, 
Kapp and Hassaurek were a few of 


102) Froebel’s speech on this occasion is reprinted in his “ Kleine Politische Schriften .” 


































' 

































































































































53 


the other prominent German Republican 
speakers, all “Forty-eighters” or closely 
allied to them. In Wisconsin this cam- 
paign brought forward for the first time 
a young man who was soon to eclipse all 
the rest and become in the eyes of the 
native-born the One political representa- 
tive of the German element. This was 
Carl Schurz, who for three years past had 
lived in the little village of Watertown. 
He was not yet a citizen of the United 
States, though under the liberal laws of 
his adopted state a voter. Young though 
he was, his name was known to every 
German because of his daring rescue of 
his beloved teacher, the poet Kinkel, 
from a Prussian prison. 103 The halo of 
romance which this Exploit cast around 
him, made him interesting also to native 
Americans, and undoubtedly aided him 
in his political career. 

Mr. Schurz had some advantages over 
his fellow “Forty-eighters” which made 
it quite natural that he rather than one 
of those who had been leaders in Germany 
should become the most conspicuous po- 
litical leader among the Germans in 
this country. First of all, he was 
very young when he came to the 
United States. When by the side of 
Kinkel he took part in the revolutionary 
events of 1848, he was but nineteen years 
of age. Thus, when four years later he 
came to this country, he was still at a 
period of life when he could easily adapt 
himself to new surroundings. His youth 
saved him from running to seed in those 
Radical vagaries in which so many other 
refugees became engaged during their 
first years of life in America. With 
astonishing rapidity he made himself 
master of the English language. While 
very many of the “Forty-eighters” never 
acquired the power of making a speech in 


English, and consequently the influence 
of their oratory remained limited to their 
countrymen, Mr. Schurz had from his 
first entry into public life the command of 
English as well as his mother tongue. 
This fact, together with his brilliant abili- 
ties, marked him out from the start as one 
of the few Germans who could form a 
connecting link between the great body 
of Americans ana the immigrated Ger- 
man element. 

Although Fremont was defeated in this 
campaign, the German Republicans no 
more than other members of the young 
party lost courage on that account. Im- 
mediately after the election was over, 
some Boston Germans issued a call to 
form a “Republican organization of all 
Germans in the Union.” The call was 
signed by Dr. Kob, Dr. Finois, C. 
Schmidt’, Dr. Douai, A. Babo. The 
proposition caused a lively discussion 
throughout the country, and was gen- 
erally favored in the East. But in the 
Western states the plan met with much 
opposition, and little came of the pro- 
ject. The German Republican Club of 
Milwaqkee, in which Domschke, the 
editor of the “Atlas,” was the leading 
spirit, declared itself against a separate 
national organization, because that might 
irritate the nativistic element. Domsch- 
ke’s paper added editorially the plea of 
poverty on the part of the Western Re- 
publicans. 104 The German Democratic 
paper at Milwaukee, the " Banner ” af- 
fected to believe that this action was a 
sign of the Republican party falling to 
pieces, and hailed it as an indication of 
“the light entering into the heads of the 
German idealists.” Whereat the “Atlas 1 ” 
became mightily indignant and wrathful. 

During the next four years the struggle 
of the “idealists” to win their countrymen 


103 ) See supra, chapter IV. 

104) “Atlas,” December 13, 1850. 














































































































54 


away from the slave holders’ party went 
on with various vicissitudes, but on the 
whole with fair success. The main bones 
of contention remained as before “know- 
nothingism” and “temperance.” One of 
the worst set-backs the Republicans re- 
ceived was the passage, in 1859, by the 
Massachusetts legislature, a strongly 
Republican body, of a law providing 
that naturalized citizens should not be 
allowed to vote until two years after ac- 
quiring full citizenship. The Democrats 
pointed out triumphantly that now at 
last the Republicans had thrown aside 
the mask of friendliness towards foreign- 
born citizens, and stood revealed as what 
they really were, inveterate knownoth- 
ings. The only defense the Republicans 
could make was that the obnoxious law 
was a local affair and that the party as a 
national organization was not in sym- 
pathy with it. But the party was evidently 
injured by it all over the country, and in 
those states where the German vote was 
largest the leaders became much fright- 
ened. In Wisconsin, the Republican state 
convention of that fall went so far as to 
insert in their platform a plank expressly 
condemning this law adopted in another 
state. 

In the meantime Wisconsin, which for 
some time had had the reputation of be- 
ing “the most German state in the 
Union,” had been involved m troubles of 
her own that had their effect upon the. 
national Republican party. In 1857, the 
Republicans had nominated Carl Schurz 
for lieutenant-governor. But when the 
votes were counted, it appeared that he 
was defeated by 107 votes, out of a total 
vote of 88,932, while the Republican can- 
didate for governor, Randall, had been 
elected by 454 votes. The rest of the 
Republican ticket was likewise success- 


ful. It could be assumed with perfect 
assurance that a large number of German 
Democrats had scratched their tickets 
in avor of their countryman. Conse- 
quently it was clear that a consider- 
able number of native-born Republi- 
cans had refused to vote for Schurz. 
Naturally the Democrats did not fail 
to point to this fact as convincing 
proof that notwithstanding the official 
protestations towards foreign-born citi- 
zens the Republican party was dominated 
by knownothing influences. The German 
press throughout the country made much 
of the affair, and everywhere the Repub- 
licans found their task of converting 
German voters made more difficult. In 
Wisconsin itself a movement was started 
by a number of German Republicans to 
bring about the nomination of Mr. Schurz 
for governor at the election of 1859. 105 
The movement was unsuccessful and Gov. 
Randall was renominated by a large ma- 
jority. Mr. Schurz was tendered the 
nomination for lieutenant-governor, but 
he declined to make the run for that office 
a second time. 106 This result was brought 
about in part by the great personal 
strength of the governor, in part by the 
natiwtic tendencies actually existing to 
some extent. But there was also a third 
reason for the German leader’s defeat 
in the peculiar character of his and his 
friends’ Republicanism. 

It is essential for an understanding of 
the political course, not only of Mr. 
Schurz individually, but of a large 
portion of the German Republicans of the 
country, to bear in mind that the German 
voters had for a generation been Demo 
crats almost to a man. Although the 
“Forty-eighters” had never been so close- 
ly connected with the party organization 
as their opponents, the “Grays,” they 


105 ) See Milwaukee Sentinel and Manitowoc “ Demokra/,” during 1859. 

106) Milwaukee Sentinel. 







































































































55 


shared with them to the full their devotion 
to “Jeffersonian prinGples” and espe- 
cially the doctrine of states’ rights and a 
strict construction of the constitution. 
When the Republican party was organ- 
ized it drew to itself on the one hand the 
Whig element, which believed in liberal 
construction, and on the other hand the 
Freesoilers and “Forty-eighters,” both of 
whom remained strict constructionists 
and states’ rights men. As long as the 
question was simply about the resistance 
to slavery aggression, these elements 
could work together very well. But as 
soon as their more fundamental prin- 
ciples were involved, a clash could hardly 
be avoided. A series of peculiar and in- 
teresting events in Wisconsin had brought 
these contrary tendencies into very sharp 
opposition, and this contributed to the 
defeat of Mr. Schurz in his aspirations 
for the gubernatorial nomination. 

On March u, 1854, a fugitive slave 
named Glover had been rescued from his 
captors by a mob in Milwaukee. Some 
of the leaders of the rescuers, among 
them Sherman Booth, a prominent aboli- 
tionist agitator, were imprisoned by the 
federal authorities, but released on a writ 
of habeas corpus issued out of the 
Supreme Court of the State of Wiscon- 
sin. The litigation growing out of this 
case was very protracted. In a number 
of lengthy and elaborate opinions the 
state court held, in effect, that a state 
tribunal may interfere with the process 
of a federal court where the latter acts 
without jurisdiction, and that the fugitive 
slave law was unconstitutional. The Su- 
preme Court of the United States, on ap- 
peal, laid down a contrary doctrine and 
reversed the judgment of the state 


court. 107 The argument of the latter was 
based entirely on the traditional grounds 
familiar in the mouths of the strict con- 
structionists. In the spring of 1859, a 
few months prior to the state convention 
before which Mr. Schurz was a candi- 
date for governor, Byron Paine was a 
candidate for the Supreme Court. He 
was known to favor the doctrine of the 
unconstitutionality of the fugitive slave 
law, and the right of the state courts to 
enforce that doctrine. On March 23, in 
Milwaukee, Mr. Schurz delivered a 
speech in support of Mr. Paine, which 
was an elaborate argument in favor of the 
most extreme states’ rights views, with 
Calhoun as the principal authority quoted. 
This speech was printed in full in the 
Milwaukee Sentinel, as well as distrib- 
uted in pamphlet form. It was not sur- 
prising that such utterances, coming from 
a Republican, should offend the old Whig 
element in the party. Several of the 
leaders, and particularly Timothy O. 
Howe, who later became a senator in 
Congress from Wisconsin, felt constrained 
to oppose these doctrines with all possible 
vigor, and did so, among other ways, by 
resisting the claims of Mr. Schurz before 
the state convention. 108 

The peculiar type of Republicanism to 
which most German members of that 
party inclined during this period is illus- 
trated also by the course of another 
prominent German-American politician, 
Charles G. Reemelin of Ohio. This 
gentleman seems to have attended the 
Pittsburg convention of 1856, where he 
made the strong impression mentioned 
above, with the idea that it was not in- 
tended to organize a permanent party, 
but merely to bring together all anti- 


107 ) See Vroman Martin, The Fugitive Slave Law in Wisconsin, Proceedings Wis- 
consin State Historical Society, 1895. Also 3 Wis. 1; 3 Wis. 145; 18 How. (U. S.) 470; 21 
How. (U. S.) 506. 

106) See letters of T. O. Howe in Hense- Jensen, Wisconsin's Deutsch-Amerikaner , vol 
I. page 315. Also Milwaukee Sentinel, passim. 















































































56 


slavery elements for the one purpose of 
preventing the extension of slavery in the 
territories. 109 In fact, Mr. Reemelin was 
of the opinion that the existence of per- 
manent parties was an unmitigated evil, 
at the bottom of all our political ailments. 
With these ideas in mind he supported 
Fremont. But being a firm believer in 
states’ rights and strict construction, he 
could not bring himself to support Lin- 
coln in i860, on account of that candi- 
date’s views on constitutional questions. 
Consequently he was, according to his 
own narrative, in a great quandary. 
For Douglas he had supreme contempt. 
“I regarded him as the most dangerous 
man in the United States.” Bell was a 
nativist, and consequently out of the ques- 
tion for a German. So this anti-slavery 
man, from sheer loyalty to the doctrine 
of states’ rights, declared in favor of 
Breckinridge. “I knew personally,” he 
says in his autobiography, “that Breckin- 
ridge was no pro-slavery man, that he 
desired a settlement which would have 
left us the integrity of our constitution 
and saved personal liberty, all without 
war and its bloody and other false so- 
lutions.” Naturally, the accession of so 
influential a convert to their rather thin 
ranks gave great joy to the Breckinridge 
Democrats of Ohio, and they hastened 
to confer upon him the honor of a nomi- 
nation for presidential elector at large, 
which “was thrust upon me against my 
desire,” he says. 110 

The great majority of the German 
Republican leaders were fortunately not 
quite so doctrinaire, but had common 
sense enough to throw all their energies 
into the fight for Lincoln’s lection, no 
matter what they may hav; thought of 
their candidate’s views on .he construc- 
tion of the constitution. n the Chicago 


convention which nominated him, there 
were among the delegates such well- 
known Germans as Muench, and Krekel, 
of Missouri ; Koerner, and Geo. Schnei- 
der, of Illinois; Hassaurek, of Ohio; and 
Schurz, of Wisconsin. All of these, with 
the exception of Krekel, belonged to the 
class of political refugees. Mr. Schurz 
had had some difficulty in being elected a 
delegate. Again the Milwaukee states’ 
rights speech had risen up to threaten 
his success, but the objections made by 
the Whig element were finally with- 
drawn, and he was made chairman of this 
state delegation. The Germans in the 
convention were in favor of Seward for 
president. Mr. Schurz was one of the 
managers for Seward, in company with 
Austin Blair, of Michigan, and William 
M. Evarts of New York. The reasons 
why the Germans were strongly in favor 
of the New York statesman seem to have 
been twofold. Their university training 
made them prefer the highly educated 
and philosophical Easterner to the able 
but comparatively uneducated and some- 
what uncouth Illinoisian, and in addition 
Seward had endeared himself to all for- 
eigners by his determined opposition to 
knownothingism. 111 When their favorite 
was defeated, the Germans did not sulk, 
but entered the campaign with enthusiasm. 
Nearly all the old Radical leaders were 
active on the stump. Carl Schurz re- 
mained the most conspicuous amongthem. 
His fame had by this time spread far be- 
yond the limits of his adopted state or 
his own nationality. In 1858 he had been 
one of the speakers in Illinois, during the 
great Lincoln-Douglas campaign. In 
1859 he delivered a speech at Boston, in 
which he attacked nativism in what was 
considered its particular home, so far as 
the North was concerned. During the 


109) See Reemelin, Life, page 130. 

110 ) Reemelin, Life, page 156. 

Hi) See John Sherman’s Recollections, I., page 137. 













































































57 


campaign of i860 he was one of the most 
prominent orators on the Republican 
side. 112 

A peculiar position was held by the 
Germans residing in the slave states, and 
particularly the border states and Texas. 
In Maryland, especially the city of Balti- 
more, and, in Kentucky, Louisville had 
very considerable German elements. In 
Missouri, St. Louis was one of the Ger- 
man strongholds of the country, and a 
number of counties in the Northern part 

of the state were almost entirely settled 

* 

by Germans. Nowhere was the fact more 
evident than here that the Germans of all 
classes had no sympathy with slavery. A 
German slaveholder was a rare excep- 
tion. In all these states there was a large 
percentage of political refugees among 
the immigrated Germans, and these were 
conspicuous in their fearless opposition 
to slavery. Their abolition views were 
usually not at all concealed, notwithstand- 
ing the danger which attended all expres- 
sion of such sentiments in la slave state. 
It was evident that the violent outbursts 
of knownothing hatred, which gave Bal- 
timore and Louisville such unenviable 
notoriety during the decade before the 
civil war, must be ascribed in no small 
degree to pro-slavery fear of these bold 
German abolitionists. 

As far back as 1851, when Thomas Ben- 
ton had his great fight with the extreme 
pro-slavery wing of his party, he found 
his principal supporters among the Ger- 
mans of his state. Conspicuous among 
these was a St. Louis lawyer, Alexander 
Kayser, who was one of those that had 


come to the United States under the in- 
fluence of Gottfried Duden 113 and at first 
tried the experiment of Latin farming. 
He was an enthusiastic admirer of Sen- 
ator Benton, but when the Republican 
party was organized he was one of the 
first to join it, although his leader held 
back. 114 His anti-slavery sentiment was 
of a more moderate sort than that of 
many of his countrymen, who in 1857 
organized themselves as the “Free 
Democrats” and severely condemned a 
set of resolutions adopted by the state 
legislature, by which it was attempted to 
put a stop to the agitation for gradual 
emancipation. These resolutions were 
characterized by the meeting as “an as- 
sault on free speech and the freedom of 
the press.” 115 These more extreme anti- 
slavery men had the enthusiastic support 
of the German Radicals, among whom 
was Heinrich Boernstein. 116 While in 
other states the Republicans -made con- 
verts among the Germans only with con- 
siderable effort and with constant danger 
of seeing them slide back into Democracy 
for fear of prohibition and nativism, the 
reverse was the case in Missouri. In 
tl is state, where the Germans knew slav- 
ery and its baneful effects by their own 
experience, and where the dominant ele- 
ment in the Democracy had the most 
extreme pro-slavery views, the Germans 
soon became Republican in their over- 
whelming majority. Only a few of their 
leading men, among whom Christian 
Kribben, the speaker of the house in the 
legislature of 1858, was the most con- 
spicuous, remained true to the old party. 
The political complexion of the Missouri 


112 ) As to some of Mr. Schurz’ speeches in this campaign, see New York Tribune, 
June 30, August 15, August 17, September 3, October 19, 1860. 

11S ) See suprdy chapter III. 

114 ) Kayser was born in Rhenish Prussia, February 1, 1815, came to St. Louis \. 
1836, was presidential elector in 1852, died during the civil war. Koerner, Op. cit. % page 342 

115 ) ■“ Anzeiger des Westens,” March 27, 1857. 

U®) See suprd , chapter II. 




















































































































58 


Germans became of the utmost im- 
portance to the welfare of the country; 
when in May, 1861, the pro-slavery men 
of the state with the governor at their 
head tried to force Missouri into the Con- 
federacy. If it had not been for the fact 
that there was a large German population 
in St. Louis, and that this element was 
Republican in its great majority and loyal 
to the Union practically without an excep- 
tion, Capt. Lyon would have been unable 
to capture the camp of the state militia. 
Three-fourths of the volunteers under 
his command were Germans. Of the 
colonels of his four regiments, three, 
Boernstein, Sigel and Schuettner, were 
political refugees from the Fatherland.* 


* Editorial Note. — In speaking of the 
gTeat work done by the Germans in Missouri 
in the cause of human liberty Dr. Emil 
Preetorius, a political refugee of 1848, de- 
serves special and most honorable mention. 
Born in 1827 in Rhenish Hesse he studied 
law at Heidelberg and Giessen and settled 
in St. Louis in 1853. During the presidential 
campaign of 18(50 he was one of the staunchest 
supporters of Abraham Lincoln and in the 
following spring, as well as throughout the 
war, he took a leading part in the organi- 
zation of Union troops in his state. In 1863 
he became the editor of the Westliche Post, 
one of the most widely circulated German 
dailies in the country, and he is still at the 
head of that journal. As a writer and 
lecturer on topics political, aesthetical and 
philosophical he has gained high distinction. 


In no state did the Germans form a 
more important part of the population 
than in Texas. Here large settlements 
had been formed by them even prior to 
the admission of the state into the Union. 
In 1856 the New York Tribune estimated 
their number at 20,000, 117 most of whom 
were massed in a few of the Western 
counties, with New Braunfels and San 
Antonio as their most important centers. 
Among them slavery was practically un- 
known, and their settlements exhibited 
the advantages of free labor by their 
superior prosperity and the greater stand- 
ard of comfort prevailing in them. 118 
This flourishing community had received 
a more than ordinary share of political 
refugees, who were as outspoken in their 
radical opinions as they were in any 
Northern state. While most of their 
countrymen held their peace on the ques- 
tion of slavery and opposed it simply by 
their example, the Radical element went 
farther. In 1853 one of their speakers, 
Wipprecht, is quoted as saying at New 
Braunfels : “Let us oppose the further 
extension of this slave-holding popula- 
tion in Western Texas, for we had culti- 
vated and settled this country before the 
natives thought of doing so.” 119 In 
1854, at San Antonio, resolutions were 
adopted demanding gradual emancipa- 
tion. 120 Dr. Charles Douai, one of the most 
radical among the “Forty-eighters,” 121 


117 ) New York Tribune, January 4, 1856. 

118 ) See F. L. Olmsted, Journey through Texas. 

110 ) Busey, Immigration, page 32. 

12 °) On the question of states’ rights regarding slavery, the resolutions were as 
follows: 

“Die Sklaverei ist ein Uebel, dessen endllche Beseitigung den Grundsatzen der Demo- 
kratie gem&ss nothwendig ist; da sie aber nur einzelne Staaten betrifft, so fordern wir, dass 
die Bundesregierung sich aller Einmischung in Sachen der Sklaverei enthalte, dass aber, 
wenn ein einzelner Staat die Beseitigung dieses Uebels beschliesst, alsdann zur Aus- 
fiihrung dieses Beschlusses die Bundeshiilfe in Anspruch genommen werden kann. ” See 
Olmsted, Op. cit. 

121 ) Douai had been principal of a school at Altenburg, in Thuringia, and came to the 
United States in 1855. After his Texas experience he went to Boston and later to New York, 
where he became well known as an educator and writer, principally on pedagogical topics. 
He was mentioned above as one of the Boston signers of a call for a German Republican or- 
ganization. 






































































































59 


for awhile published a German paper 
in San Antonio, in which he advocated 
abolition. Some of his exciting experi- 
ences in this connection are interestingly 
told by F. L. Olmsted, who, however, 
does not give his name. 122 

The activity of the political refugeesi 
during the civil war and in the period 
thereafter does not come within the limits 
of this monograph. It is well known that 
a number of them, like Sigel, Osterhaus, 
Willich and others rose to high rank in 
the Union army, while hundreds of others 
served faithfully in more subordinate 
capacities. It may safely be said that not 
a single refugee of any note became dis- 
loyal to the government of the United 
States or to the principles of human 
liberty for which he had contended in his 
native country. Even Oswald Otten- 
dorfer, who was one of the few “Forty- 
eighters” that failed to join the Repub- 
lican party, promptly resigned his can- 
didacy for presidential elector in i860, 
when the Democratic convention at 
Charleston was captured by the extreme 
pro-slavery men, and during the whole 
of the armed conflict he was a devoted 
adherent of the Union cause. In Texas 
the Germans with the refugees as their 
leaders formed the nucleus of a strong 
Union party, and many of them suffered 
severely for their loyalty, notably Ed- 
ward Degener, a member of the Frank- 
furt parliament, and after the war a rep- 
resentative in Congress. During the 
reconstruction period the political power 
of the Germans in Missouri and Texas 


was naturally great, greater than it has 
been at any other time, and this gave ad- 
ditional prominence to a number of 
“Forty-eighters,” notably Carl Schurz, 
who had removed to St. Louis and was 
elected a senator in Congress from Mis- 
souri. The fact that the German Repub- 
licans of that generation had Democratic 
rather than Whig antecedents must not 
be forgotten when it is sought to explain 
why so many of them drifted back into 
the Democratic ranks after the slavery 
question had been disposed of. 

The serious work of the anti-slavery 
agitation and the civil war produced a 
great change in the mental attitude of the 
revolutionists of 1848. The eccentricities 
of the early years in exile wore off ; the 
excessively idealistic notions of politics 
were modified by a sounder conception of 
the realities of things. Theory was 
superseded by practice. The radicalism 
of 1852 disappeared with great rapidity. 
Soon Carl Heinzen remained almost its 
only representative, and when he died at 
Boston, in 1880, his political views had 
long ceased to be a vital force in the 
German- American population. 

It would be extravagant to assign to 
the German political refugees a central 
position in any of the crises of our na- 
tional life. But the effects of their activity 
are important, and a true understanding 
of the development of the American 
people, the shaping of parties and their 
rise and fall, is impossible without taking 
them into account. 

THE END. 


122 ) In Helper’s “Impending 1 Crisis’* it is stated on the authority of Cassius M. Clay 
that “in Texas among the German settlers, who true to their national instincts will not em- 
ploy the labor of a slave, they produce more cotton to the acre, and of a better quality, and 
selling at prices from a cent to a cent and a half a pound higher than that produced by slave 
abor. ’’ Impending Crisis, page 182. 






















































































































Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing Agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: 




PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGIES, L.P. 
1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Twp., PA 16066 
(412) 779-2111 







